- 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 2/2/23 at 11:21 am to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:21 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Lawyers will be valuable in this thread when the trial comes around, they're just obfuscating the shite out of it right now.
Any lawyer knows that trial prep begins on day one. If you don't understand how it will play out at trial, how can you evaluate your case, from either side?
I think I've said here many times that I am pro-prosecution. I've also pointed out that I have personally tried a lot of technical cases.
By the way,
quote:is exactly what defense counsel will do. Do you think it might be a good idea for the prosecution to understand now how they might do that at trial?
obfuscating the shite out of it
Otherwise, I guess I'll defer to your expertise. What was it again?
This post was edited on 2/2/23 at 11:23 am
3
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:30 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
all the evidence that supports that she did have a BAC of .32 For example, video of her falling 3 times inside the bar and on her way out the bar and video of her drinking random drinks off of other tables.
And the defendants themselves saying she was drunk drunk and drunker than drunk
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:34 am to tigerskin
quote:
And the defendants themselves saying she was drunk drunk and drunker than drunk
It's strong evidence. And if the injuries from the incident are what we think they are, it it going to be extremely difficult to argue consent, as they would have been very painful. (Apologies for being graphic; that is about as tactfully as it can be said, and it is a crucial fact).
But remember that the .319 is too high based on other evidence. When I saw that number in the arrest affidavit, I thought there was a clean narrative that created an open and shut case. It is still very compelling, but not as clean as it looked at first.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:35 am to JudgeHolden
I'm pro-prosecution on steroids. But I appreciate the perspective. Makes us sharpen our pencils.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:37 am to JudgeHolden
What does the verbiage of the consent while inebriated law look like and when was it effective?
If a woman can't consent after just a few drinks and the law was on the books before say 92, I could have put myself in harms way during my time in school.
But I'm talking "tipsy to regular drunk". Never "drunker than drunk".
If a woman can't consent after just a few drinks and the law was on the books before say 92, I could have put myself in harms way during my time in school.
But I'm talking "tipsy to regular drunk". Never "drunker than drunk".
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:39 am to Rebel
quote:
Rebel
Stand by.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:39 am to JudgeHolden
quote:
Any lawyer knows that trial prep begins on day one
Correct, this isn't a court, nor a jury. We're not paid to
trial prep.
I figure if this goes another 300 pages, one person might change their mind.
Hopefully after three to four days of this, some new information comes out that will make this interesting again.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:40 am to AlwysATgr
Every post in this thread that comes close to “well, the defense may try to argue XYZ” has been met with some pretty idiotic replies that include insults and personal attacks regardless of the poster’s previous comments about what he or she personally believes. Just too emotional of a topic for some people.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:43 am to Rebel
quote:Is not currently the law and never was the law. Otherwise, nearly every man in existence could be accused and convicted of rape if the woman chose to. Consent goes further than that. However, college students (usually males and especially athletes) are warned that any attempt at sexual activity when a woman has been drinking opens you up to those kinds of accusations and that it’s best to avoid them completely.
If a woman can't consent after just a few drinks
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:45 am to ell_13
quote:
Every post in this thread that comes close to “well, the defense may try to argue XYZ” has been met with some pretty idiotic replies that include insults and personal attacks regardless of the poster’s previous comments about what he or she personally believes. Just too emotional of a topic for some people.
I like hearing all the perspectives from both a defense and prosecution standpoint.
I dislike the inflammatory shite. Fortunately, most of that gets called out or scratched by the admins.
Replying to you ell, not referring to you though. I think you have been overall reasonable.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:46 am to Rebel
quote:
What does the verbiage of the consent while inebriated law look like and when was it effective?
Best I can tell, the current verbiage (below) went into effect in 2015. Before that, there was a "simple rape" that referred to "unsoundness of mind."
Legislative history is tricky, and I gotta get on some real work. But I think that is how it played out.
The language in effect for this case will be:
quote:
When the victim is incapable of resisting or of understanding the nature of the act by reason of a stupor or abnormal condition of mind produced by an intoxicating agent or any cause and the offender knew or should have known of the victim's incapacity.
A drunk person can consent to sex, even if "drunk, drunk." The question is whether the person was so drunk that they could not resist or was incapable of understanding the act.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:47 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Why do you want to censor discussion that covers what could happen in court?
Correct, this isn't a court, nor a jury. We're not paid to trial prep.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:49 am to JudgeHolden
quote:Bingo.
A drunk person can consent to sex, even if "drunk, drunk." The question is whether the person was so drunk that they could not resist or was incapable of understanding the act.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:50 am to JudgeHolden
quote:
drunk person can consent to sex, even if "drunk, drunk." The question is whether the person was so drunk that they could not resist or was incapable of understanding the act.
Judge, at what point is legally too drunk?
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:50 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Hopefully after three to four days of this, some new information comes out that will make this interesting again.
Or . . .
We could keep gathering information, thinking through angles that have not been explored, and trying to understand what might matter.
Think about this. We all saw her stumble in the video at the end. A lot of us thought, hmm, that shows she was pretty intoxicated. Then someone who has been to Reggie's recently pointed out that there are tree roots above ground right where she stumbled.
You can think through thing and narrow down possibilities without having someone feed you "new information."
This is the OT, by God We've solved crimes before this one.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:52 am to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Judge, at what point is legally too drunk?
.08 for driving, and .20 for vehicular homicide.
That's from memory, but I think it is right.
There is not going to be a hard number in this case for two reasons. First, what makes one person "incapable" may not do it to another. How we react to liquor is subjective. Second, some people who are very drunk and might be "incapable" might look like they are capable. If the offender did not and should not have known of the incapacity, there has not been third degree rape.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:53 am to JudgeHolden
The way they say she was grabbing drinks off of random tables in the bar, it makes it even more believable she could have knocked back a few in the truck if the idiots had a bottle. 50 min. is enough time for her to drink some, then it takes effect in 10 min. or so and rapes. That part could have taken about 30 min. Then leaving 20 min. for the drop off and accident.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:53 am to JudgeHolden
quote:is this where the fact that he had to ask her five times comes into play?
The question is whether the person was so drunk that they could not resist or was incapable of understanding the act.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:53 am to ell_13
quote:
Why do you want to censor discussion that covers what could happen in court?
He is just obfuscating.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 11:54 am to JudgeHolden
quote:
But remember that the .319 is too high based on other evidence.
Nah it’s funny how everyone thinks they know exactly what .319 looks like in every individual person.
We have already seen video in this thread of a.36 person walking fine
This post was edited on 2/2/23 at 11:54 am
Page 339 of 419
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News