- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:39 pm to Elcid96
quote:
No these statements from the GJ won't be entered alone, because it is hearsay, however hearsay would of been used in the GJ to indict.
I see, so it protects the DA's actual witness testimony from being put on the record until trial. Interesting move.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:41 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
Again. Sat in on a La. GJ? Ever?
Sat in a full semester of Criminal Procedure with two days on Grand Jury procedure.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:41 pm to zeebo
Zeebo so what are u saying here? As it relates to this case
This post was edited on 9/21/11 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:41 pm to RobbBobb
Um...the Federal Rules of Evidence are not the same as the Louisiana rules. Much of it is the same, but not all. That's why they print both (I have to buy them, so I know)
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:42 pm to CptBengal
quote:
so it protects the DA's actual witness testimony from being put on the record until trial. Interesting move.
yeah
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:42 pm to Elcid96
Yeah, just wanted to be clear. I figured you meant for impeachment purposes only, but there are a bunch of non-attorneys here.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:42 pm to zeebo
quote:Two Questions:
Except for death cases, we use gj to ditch cases....
(1) How well does the gj work to ditch cases? (Pretty well I'd imagine, or you'd stop doing it.)
(2) Have you ever tried to indict a ham sandwich or shrimp poboy?
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:45 pm to just me
quote:
Have you ever tried to indict a ham sandwich or shrimp poboy?
The shrimp poboy was guilty as hell.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
so it protects the DA's actual witness testimony from being put on the record until trial. Interesting move.
Yeah, buddy.
But, again, we may potential throw the typical DA playbook out here if Moore actually lets the witnesses testify to the GJ.
However, this is all over nothing. John Jefferson's alleged statement to the report isn't going to be presented to the GJ. The DA is not going to care about it. They know it will never come into trial and it really doesn't add anything to the case.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:46 pm to Antonio Moss
So what have we all learned today, class?
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:46 pm to just me
quote:
How well does the gj work to ditch cases? (Pretty well I'd imagine
I would imagine it's easy to get a GJ to no bill a charge when you're the only one presenting evidence.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:47 pm to just me
quote:
How well does the gj work to ditch cases? (Pretty well I'd imagine, or you'd stop doing it.)
my feeling from DA friends is that they can make the GJ do whatever they want, so if they have an iffy case and don't feel comfortable trying it (or the plea they'll have to get), they'll tank the GJ and the GJ likely won't indict. then the ADA is protected
and it works the other way, politically. say a cop fricks up badly and there is a bullshite charge. the cop plays it up to cover his arse. the DA doesn't want to cross his cops (esp in a small parish), so he'll go to the GJ and "let the courts sort it out"
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:47 pm to Wideman
quote:
So what have we all learned today, class?
That we still have no clue what is going to happen.
But hey, it has been entertaining.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:48 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
the typical DA playbook out here if Moore actually lets the witnesses testify to the GJ.
you are assuming, again, that all witnesses are truthful. I believe based on his comments about perjury and under oath he is using this to weed through the bullshite.
quote:
They know it will never come into trial and it really doesn't add anything to the case.
I dont know. It seems it goes to credibility of the defendant. But who knows. We'll likely find out in 2 or 3 weeks.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:49 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
they can make the GJ do whatever they want
This.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:49 pm to Wideman
quote:
So what have we all learned today, class?
Ham sammiches get off. Shrimp poboys get fried.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:49 pm to Antonio Moss
i personally think moore is using this to indirectly clear JJ, so nobody can claim any funny business. that's what i've been calling for a while...esp when they came down with felony charges
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:50 pm to CptBengal
quote:
you are assuming, again, that all witnesses are truthful.
I never assumed that at all.
quote:
I dont know. It seems it goes to credibility of the defendant.
Maybe . . .if they could get it in . . . which they can't.
Posted on 9/21/11 at 2:51 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i personally think moore is using this to indirectly clear JJ, so nobody can claim any funny business.
I know for a fact that he never looked at the file before setting it up for GJ.
Moore doesn't want to be anywhere near this case.
ETA: Although, I'm not positive they'll no bill it. I can see them indicting.
This post was edited on 9/21/11 at 2:53 pm
Page 15 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News