- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: Deputies arrest 4 in LSU student Madison Brooks case
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:39 am to TheRouxGuru
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:39 am to TheRouxGuru
quote:No.
Oh, well SFP and I say it, so it must be gospel
quote:No.
Are you an attorney like SFP?
0
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:39 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Again, have you watched the Nak video?
That's what you want to call rampant, unverified information, knock yourself out.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:40 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Most of this thread is the same damn thing.
Says the man who keeps posting the same damn thing.
Seriously. You have no takes. You have no information. You have no relevant experience. You just want to declare facts and have us all accept them.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:40 am to dallastigers
The question is where Haley went to law school
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:40 am to JudgeHolden
quote:
Says the man who keeps posting the same damn thing.
After 4 days, maybe you'll get it.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:41 am to ell_13
quote:
He goes into more detail and we have some confirmation of her actions in the car because he saw the videos.
Curious - is it generally considered ethical/legal for an attorney to show possible evidence to a reporter? No doubt that likely happens in more than just this case.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:41 am to dallastigers
quote:
Where did you go to law school?
It was a weak take in a pre coffee lapse of judgment. I think I’ve said that.
But I guarantee my law school was better than yours.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:43 am to JudgeHolden
quote:
It was a weak take in a pre coffee lapse of judgment. I think I’ve said that.
But I guarantee my law school was better than yours.
Oh shite yea.
where'd y'all each go to law school so we can judge?
This is where I parked my car.
Haven't had a reason to say that in a year or 10.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:44 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Based on what we know today, this comes off as wishcasting trying to make a horrible situation worse than it already is.
To be fair, I don't think it could be much more horrible. Much of what we "know" so far is only speculation or statements from the accused themselves, who would likely be trying to paint themselves in a favorable light.
Also, her memorial (a cross and flowers) is set up in front of University Villas and the adjacent neighborhood across Burbank from Pelican Lakes. I assume this is where she died, but if others have info, please share. Plus, the driveway into Pelican Lakes is pretty long. She would have had to walk quite a ways, to get back to Burbank.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:45 am to jdd48
quote:The defense wants to control the narrative so in a case like this, yes. Think of some big cases where you had defendants give one on one media interviews yet don’t take the stand. It’s a tactic.
is it generally considered ethical/legal for an attorney to show possible evidence to a reporter? No doubt that likely happens in more than just this case.
Now, people have two choices. They can say Nak is a shill for the defense and nothing he says is a fair representation on the videos or he’s being honest and giving his own interpretations. We have seen a couple posts attack Nak’s character already.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:45 am to jdd48
quote:
Curious - is it generally considered ethical/legal for an attorney to show possible evidence to a reporter? No doubt that likely happens in more than just this case.
The rule:
quote:
a) A lawyer who is participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation of a matter shall not make an extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be disseminated by means of public communication and will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter.
(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a lawyer may state: (1) the claim, offense or defense involved and, except when prohibited by law, the identity of the persons involved; (2) information contained in a public record; (3) that an investigation of a matter is in progress; (4) the scheduling or result of any step in litigation; (5) a request for assistance in obtaining evidence and information necessary thereto; (6) a warning of danger concerning the behavior of a person involved, when there is reason to believe that there exists the likelihood of substantial harm to an individual or to the public interest; and (7) in a criminal case, in addition to subparagraphs (1) through (6): (i) the identity, residence, occupation and family status of the accused; (ii) if the accused has not been apprehended, information necessary to aid in apprehension of that person; (iii) the fact, time and place of arrest; and (iv) the identity of investigating and arresting officers or agencies and the length of the investigation.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a lawyer may make a statement that a reasonable lawyer would believe is required to protect a client from the substantial undue prejudicial effect of recent publicity not initiated by the lawyer or the lawyer’s client. A statement made pursuant to this paragraph shall be limited to such information as is necessary to mitigate the recent adverse publicity
. (d) No lawyer associated in a firm or government agency with a lawyer subject to paragraph (a) shall make a statement prohibited by paragraph (a).
Section (c) is what the lawyers will hang their hat on. They will say that the prosecution released a one-sided arrest affidavit, which they are entitled to counter with information of their own.
This post was edited on 1/30/23 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:46 am to ell_13
quote:
Again, have you watched the Nak video?
Where is the Nak video?
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:48 am to Gris Gris
quote:
Where is the Nak video
There’s a link a few pages back. It’s an interview and story with some race baiting PoS journalist in Houston.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:48 am to Gris Gris
It was on 271. But not sure if it has moved due to posts removed.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:49 am to JudgeHolden
quote:quote:
Where did you go to law school?
It was a weak take in a pre coffee lapse of judgment. I think I’ve said that.
But I guarantee my law school was better than yours.
So just another weak take. Is this one a pre or post coffee lapse of judgement.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:51 am to ell_13
quote:
Only Angel seems to think this. SFP and others like myself have speculated that her demeanor on the videos in the car is crucial for a jury especially one in BR. But the case has not fallen apart at all. It’s just more nuanced than the absolute worst case scenario that people first imagined when they saw a picture of her and a picture of them.
That’s weird bc I just said that I still think it’s rape due to being drunk and consent. Where it has fallen apart is the narrative.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:51 am to Spasweezy
quote:
There’s a link a few pages back. It’s an interview and story with some race baiting PoS journalist in Houston.
Was funny how the black guy for some reason had to start with “this is dividing people on racial lines” then turns it over to Nak like…..be careful what you say white boy
This post was edited on 1/30/23 at 11:52 am
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:52 am to notbilly
quote:
I think (not certain) she was trying to get to a friend's house. I didn't know my friend's addresses in college. She could have been getting the addresses and/or directions wrong. If she was trying to find a specific house in those newer subdivisions, that is a challenge b/c those houses all look similar in the cookie-cutter neighborhoods
Agree with this that it seems most likely. Hell I have to slow down in my Dad's neighborhood because his house looks just like his neighbors and I've been going there for years. Houses are almost indistinguishable from the front.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 11:53 am to Gris Gris
Posted on 1/30/23 at 12:04 pm to LSUAngelHere1
quote:
That’s weird bc I just said that I still think it’s rape due to being drunk and consent. Where it has fallen apart is the narrative
And you say stupid shite like she wanted to fk all of them, but it’s rape due to incapacity to consent.
It can’t be both.
If it’s rape due to incapacitation. She didn’t have the capacity to “want to frick them all.”
Drunk people do stupid shite all the time:
Urinate in public
Take clothes off
Sleep in the bushes
Fall in a lake a drown
None of those are things the drunk person “wanted” to do. So, characterizing any of the girls behavior as wanting anything is inappropriate and victim blaming.
This post was edited on 1/30/23 at 12:05 pm
Page 286 of 419
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News