re: Deputies arrest 4 in LSU student Madison Brooks case

Short lunch break.

Anyone got anything firm on additional LP charges against Washington?

quote:

---

A woman made some decisions that led to these men feeling guilty enough about her death, that they stepped forward. Is that clear enough?

---

Apparently not since that’s not what happened. They didn’t step forward out of guilt.

It’s human nature to try to get to the facts of what took place. Some people are simply curious. Others could maybe learn something about the investigative process and the science behind some evidence. Others have kids their age and want to know what her and her friends could have done differently to avoid being in such a vulnerable state. Or maybe some could learn what carver and the 17 year old could have done differently to pass that on to their sons. There’s the obvious: don’t hang with scum, don’t let them take advantage of a drunk girl. A girl that drunk cannot consent. Simply feeling bad about it isn’t enough. Have a lawyer with you when you speak to police. But also what could he have done at the end of the night to keep her alive? If someone’s son is bringing a girl home and she’s too drunk to tell him where to go, what should he do? What if she wants to get out? Do you let her even if you know it’s not safe? There are lots of lessons here. I have a young son. This story makes me think about what kind of man I hope he becomes. That he has good sense, good friends, and courage.

Quick thoughts on her phone:

If she did not have her phone, it is evidence of her intoxication, and it increases her vulnerability, explaining why she might have left with the four. I think that fact favors the prosecution.

If she did have her phone, there are a lot of possibilities.

— You could argue she was too intoxicated to Uber home, which is what most people would have done. (Sub question here: are surge prices ridiculous at Reggie’s when it is closing?). Favors prosecution, I think.

—She could have easily found her own address on Uber, or the address of someone she knew. Favors prosecution.

—She arguably could have declined to Uber because she wanted to go with them. Note. I am not maligning her. I am exploring all possibilities. . The defense, which has made some pretty strong claims, may argue this.

—She could have called someone she knew to help her out. Favors prosecution.

So in my off the cuff analysis while gulping down some red beans, I think the phone issue is going to help the prosecutors no matter how it turns out.

Gotta jet.

quote:

---

If the 3 different places are houses on same street would that alter peoples opinion? If it’s 3 places in 5 minutes you could say they tried to find a the house for 5 minutes.

---

it may alter peoples opinion. I don’t know. The point it makes is that it means they (eta: carver at least) did try to bring her where she wanted to go. I know the source. I know why it’s out there. Doesn’t mean it’s not true if a third party relays the information.

quote:

---

You are putting way too much faith in this narrative.

---

We have discussed it way more than necessary no doubt. I never thought it would be such a point of discussion because it doesn’t make anyone less guilty of what happened prior to dropping her off. People just really don’t want to change how they originally perceived the nights events.

quote:

---

You are putting way too much faith in this narrative.

---

Most people have a terrible time picking through pertinent information and leaving out the fluff.

You do not want these people on a jury deciding your fate. They get tripped up on the slightest piece of insignificant Info.

Is that supposed to be an argument of something? I don’t get it.

quote:

---

They get tripped up on the slightest piece of insignificant Info

---

In my response I just said it wasn’t significant at all to the crime just the overall narrative. It’s the people who get upset about it changing the narrative and think with emotions that you don’t want on juries.

The science you are referencing said this woman was forcibly anally raped, a judge concurred, and based on an autopsy of her body, and statements given by these.....

quote:

---

The science you are referencing said this woman was forcibly anally raped

---

No. We have discussed a lot about BAC and there was a really good discussion in this thread when a lab tech came in and got very technical. It was excellent information. That’s what I was referencing. You’re emotional and making things up about me to make you feel better.

quote:

---

a judge concurred

---

There was no doubt to there being enough evidence for him to set bonds. No one disagrees with that.

quote:

---

and based on an autopsy of her body, and statements given by these.....

---

Uh. Are you okay?

quote:

---

woman made some decisions that led to these men feeling guilty enough about her death, that they stepped forward. Is that clear enough?

---

Have we turned this into an alternative history thread now?