Started By
Message

re: Gasser didn't testify in McKnight case; Guilty of manslaughter

Posted on 1/26/18 at 9:13 am to
Posted by slackster
Houston
Member since Mar 2009
86994 posts
Posted on 1/26/18 at 9:13 am to
quote:

the general rule is probably bad acts evidence is not admissable, but there are some exceptions. I haven't paid close attention and don't know what exception the judge relied upon, but it seems on its face that the prejudicial nature of that evidence would heavily outweigh it's evidentiary value.


It's one of those things that seems incredibly relevant to the average Joe, but a court of law is a different story. I was surprised it was allowed.
Posted by Splackavellie
Bayou
Member since Oct 2017
10252 posts
Posted on 1/26/18 at 9:15 am to
quote:

the general rule is probably bad acts evidence is not admissable, but there are some exceptions. I haven't paid close attention and don't know what exception the judge relied upon, but it seems on its face that the prejudicial nature of that evidence would heavily outweigh it's evidentiary value.


Good explanation, thanks.
Posted by PearlJam
NotBeardEaves
Member since Aug 2014
13908 posts
Posted on 1/26/18 at 9:16 am to
quote:

It's one of those things that seems incredibly relevant to the average Joe
Right. The legal theory is that just because someone did something else in the past, it isn't evidence that they acted that way on this occasion, and, as such, introducing such evidence is extremely prejudicial to the defendant.
Posted by tgrbaitn08
Member since Dec 2007
146864 posts
Posted on 1/26/18 at 9:23 am to
quote:

one of those things that seems incredibly relevant to the average Joe


I see what you did there
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram