- 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
re: "Third party" eyewitnesses name now public..
Posted on 8/25/11 at 6:52 pm to EricB
Posted on 8/25/11 at 6:52 pm to EricB
quote:
If it wasn't JJ then who could it have been? Too many witnesses already -- she was just the 3rd party homerun hitter the police needed. The fricking problem here is that some of you people already had your minds made up-- and you were wrong -- and now you need to gtf over it because the sooner this shite is over the better off the team will be.
It could have been any one of the football players at the bar, or a regular dude. Your routine is getting old quick.
0
Posted on 8/25/11 at 6:57 pm to EricB
quote:
If it wasn't JJ then who could it have been?
It wasn't JJ, dude. The kicker isn't near JJ's height.
You think they're just going to toss JJ in the tank because "I guess it could've been him?" It could've been anyone at the bar. It could've been someone at a neighboring bar. It could've been Mr. T. What I'm getting at is that it's all speculation right now. All I've seen in your posts regarding this are comments tearing down JJ and want to see him get thrown into Angola as soon as possible before anything is found out. WTF?
The "homerun hitter" isn't anything of the sort.
As it was stated just a few posts earlier:
"If you are not a victim, and you are not a suspect, but you are a friend of the victim or suspect you are a biased 3rd party witness."
By this, she loses credibility in the case as a "smoking gun."
This post was edited on 8/25/11 at 7:00 pm
Posted on 8/25/11 at 6:57 pm to musick
quote:
She knows johns because she is around the same age as his and she is from DS and he is from central?
quote:
Really?
Most involved high school students know the faces of the LSU signees that played football in their district. It is certainly not that far of a stretch to think that she could recognize Johns because of that.
Posted on 8/25/11 at 7:03 pm to VernonPLSUfan
quote:
Credibility. She's nineteen and hanging around a bar. Not a good start.
she works in a bar
Posted on 8/25/11 at 7:03 pm to ashy larry
quote:
when you are chosen to be on that jury, then you have a point. But it is not the job of the general public to determine whether she is credible or not.
So a citizen never has a legitimate right to question the motives of a witness in a criminal proceeding??? That's where your flawed logic leads.
Extrapolating on that, we should just go ahead and do away with all local commentary on criminal matters. No WAFB Streetbeat, no Advocate criminal reports, no RedSchtick satire, nothing.
Heaven forbid we dare to question the motivations of a witness.
quote:
What other investigations are you currently acting as a watchdog for the parish?
Just this matter.
Once again, applying your faulty logic, if you don't follow every criminal proceeding in EBR, you have no legitimate right to voice a concern in the current matter. Save unless you are a member of law enforcement or on the jury (which would be against the law oh BTW).
quote:
I wish you could take the purple and gold blinders off for 2 seconds to realize how ridiculous you sound. I don't want to see JJ or anyone else railroaded here either. But you pretending to be doing this as a public service is embarrassing to rest of the fans.
P&G blinders... Seriously?
I never claimed to be an objective voice.
I simply stated that a witness in a high profile case should expect to have her past explored thoroughly. That's it.
Yet somehow this makes me an "embarrassment" to the rest of the fans???
Posted on 8/25/11 at 7:21 pm to The312
quote:
"third party, n. (1818) A person who is not a party to a lawsuit, agreement, or other transaction but who is usu. somehow implicated in it; someone other than the principal parties. — Also termed outside party; third person. See party. [Cases: Federal Civil Procedure 281; Parties 49.] — third-party, adj."
Pretty sure that definition is to a third party, not a third party witness. For example, if you have a contract of auto insurance with XYZ insurance company and you hit me, I am a third party to the contract - that is I'm not a party to the contract but I can make a claim under the insurance contract if you rear end me.
Also, FWIW, in my experience, Black's Law Dictionary is rarely used in the practice. I think I've seen more citations to Webster's over the years than to Blacks.
Page 8 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News