- 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 12:59 pm to GRIZZ
Posted on 2/2/23 at 12:59 pm to GRIZZ
quote:
Derailing a bit here to gain some knowledge. I realize a report was made regarding the 12yo getting raped by Washington, but was a rape kit ever collected or were there any other witnesses. And if not, how will they go about prosecuting him for this rape.
The victim will testify. She may put on friends to say that she told others about it at the time. Here mother will testify that she reported it to police. There may be witnesses to corroborate that they were both in the same place at the same time, and that the victim was crying when Washington left.
I don't think there has to be medical evidence to prove rape. And as some of you may be sensing, I do not think that scientific evidence is as powerful as the general public thinks. CSI ain't real.
2
Posted on 2/2/23 at 12:59 pm to JudgeHolden
I really don't get the focus on the Uber driver and charges. Let's just say she was drunk in a car that pulled out in front of the Uber driver...nobody would question the guy that wasn't drunk. Fow all we know she darted out, stumbled, tried to flag down the Uber driver at the last second and got hit.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:01 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
I really don't get the focus on the Uber driver and charges. Let's just say she was drunk in a car that pulled out in front of the Uber driver...nobody would question the guy that wasn't drunk. Fow all we know she darted out, stumbled, tried to flag down the Uber driver at the last second and got hit.
I don't either. And remember, the Uber driver can be a powerful witness for the prosecution. You don't really want to charge him, which would undercut his credibility.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:01 pm to JudgeHolden
Given the LP rape case is one defendant, one victim, and facts as we know them are straightforward, time frame on that going to trial? Would seem it'd be resolved prior to the EBR case. She's 12 and can't consent.
Might be some issues regarding trying him as an adult or not for that. Can that be appealed?
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:01 pm to JudgeHolden
Got it. Thanks!
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:01 pm to JudgeHolden
Normally I would agree about the procedures as I just watched a case where it was disputed by the defense ad nauseam (the jury didn't buy it). But in this case with her going to the hospital and donating organs, there were probably multiple samples taken. If they are all consistent, any legitimate questioning of the procedures will be out of the window. At least from an expert, the lawyer may still try to insinuate something.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:03 pm to ryanlsu
quote:
But in this case with her going to the hospital and donating organs, there were probably multiple samples taken. If they are all consistent, any legitimate questioning of the procedures will be out of the window.
That's the hope, particularly if the later readings follow the expected decline curve. Fingers crossed on that one.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:04 pm to HodsonTiger13
quote:
Given the LP rape case is one defendant, one victim, and facts as we know them are straightforward, time frame on that going to trial? Would seem it'd be resolved prior to the EBR case. She's 12 and can't consent.
Baw. We have been through this part many times. About tree fiddy times if memory serves.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:04 pm to ryanlsu
The defense is likely answer shopping now, trying to find a credible expert BAC witness willing to say what they want them to say. It`s hard to believe a so called professional expert is willing to say what their clients want weather it`s the truth or not, I`m sure it happens all the time unfortunately. Any so called expert that has been proven to have done this surly can not be considered credible and should be called out before or during the trial.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:06 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
the Uber driver can be a powerful witness for the prosecution. You don't really want to charge him, which would undercut his credibility.
Exactly.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:09 pm to inspectweld
quote:
It`s hard to believe a so called professional expert is willing to say what their clients want
I get the point, but I do not think that is quite it.
Say you were choosing an expert on whether Covid vaccines were safe. Your side of the case is that they are not. You would go find an expert who has very publicly criticized the safety of Covid vaccines, and the other side would hire Fauci or someone like him.
Experts have predispositions. People tend to hire the expert predisposed toward their side.
There is another type of expert I have seen. This is the expert who is convinced he or she is the smartest expert alive. When hired, they will find some angle that no one ever thought of before, whether it makes sense or not, to show just how smart they are. Obviously that angle will favor the side that hired them. But the motivation is not purely money for them. It is ego. These experts are not usually effective, but I have seen a number of them.
This post was edited on 2/2/23 at 1:13 pm
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:18 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
Experts have predispositions. People tend to hire the expert predisposed toward their side.
There is another type of expert I have seen. This is the expert who is convinced he or she is the smartest expert alive. When hired, they will find some angle that no one ever thought of before, whether it makes sense or not, to show just how smart they are. Obviously that angle will favor the side that hired them. But the motivation is not purely money for them. It is ego. These experts are not usually effective, but I have seen a number of them.
We have multiple experts we use on the defense side of personal injury cases. You're absolutely right in your post above. I've also found that someone who can connect with the jury and testify in terms they can understand is invaluable. Also, some experts are just not likable and it shows in the jury's faces when they're testifying.
This post was edited on 2/2/23 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:19 pm to JudgeHolden
What experts would the defendants use and what would they cost?
Could be an expensive defense to hire the right people.
Could be an expensive defense to hire the right people.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:21 pm to inspectweld
You'd be surprised regarding "expert" witnesses. Some are reputable and testify with integrity. Others are whores, and will say whatever they're told - for an extremely high fee. Opposing attorneys typically don't call them out or file complaints to licensing boards because they don't understand the subject matter in depth, or want to have the option to use them in the future if the need arises. Or both.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:38 pm to Bill Parker?
If that Whore your talking about tries to get up there with some off the wall BS he needs to be, called out, slapped with a perjury charge, laughed out of court and sent “kickin cans down Da road” career over.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:43 pm to inspectweld
For the Medical cases I’ve been involved with in Louisiana, the hired gun say whatever is needed to get paid guys tend to come in from out of state. To me that’s a notch in credibility from the get go to the jury.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:44 pm to Bill Parker?
Wasn't there an expert that said breathalyzers (?) are inaccurate and a Judge agreed? And a Judge was on trial?
Battle of the experts is all science mumbo jumbo to jurors and they'll just believe what their pre-bias leads them to believe.
Better is what the defendants said themselves. Plus, we don't know what's on the full video / all the video and what they said after to each other or other friends.
Battle of the experts is all science mumbo jumbo to jurors and they'll just believe what their pre-bias leads them to believe.
Better is what the defendants said themselves. Plus, we don't know what's on the full video / all the video and what they said after to each other or other friends.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 1:55 pm to PsychTiger
quote:
You don't want to win your trial?
yes. SFP is better attorney than he is a poster.
if I didn't care about winning, I'd hire Hank or Boosie.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 2:01 pm to GRIZZ
I don`t think any details of evidence have been reported publicly. Other than what was initially reported.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 2:12 pm to lctiger
Well he needs to be sent “kickin cans down Da road” back to that state, after being, called out, laughed at, charged and jailed. And anybody who sits there and doesn`t take action on him is just as guilty.
“Fk him and the horse he road in on”
“Fk him and the horse he road in on”
Page 341 of 419
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News