- 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: Driver in Madison Brooks case waives jury trial
Posted on 9/25/25 at 5:33 pm to tigerbait17
Posted on 9/25/25 at 5:33 pm to tigerbait17
quote:
This trial is going to be absolutely brutal
As it should be…there is enough blame to go around to everyone involved.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 6:23 pm to Spankum
I hope they all get the maximum sentence. What these scumbags did is inexcusable . A bunch of young punks had their way with a young intoxicated girl..makes me sick.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 10:28 pm to Ingeniero
When you waive a jury trial, the judge has indicated in chambers a not guilty verdict or a light sentence. Otherwise you would be an idiot to waive a jury trial.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 10:31 pm to Shexter
What a circus. Feel for this family.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 10:39 pm to UptownJoeBrown
quote:
When you waive a jury trial, the judge has indicated in chambers a not guilty verdict or a light sentence. Otherwise you would be an idiot to waive a jury trial.
This isn’t true at all. There are all kinds of reasons to waive jury trials. You see it a lot with overly technical cases.
From what the guys attorney has said it looks like the defense doesn’t want a jury trial because they think the prosecutions case against him (the driver) is weak and they don’t want an emotional jury that just wants to make sure someone gets punished.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 10:42 pm to whoa
quote:
Smart move by his lawyer. The judge’s son is serial rapist and she got in trouble last year for letting a rapist free.
This is why the true thing that AI needs to replace is the lawyers and judges.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 11:09 pm to UptownJoeBrown
quote:
When you waive a jury trial, the judge has indicated in chambers a not guilty verdict or a light sentence. Otherwise you would be an idiot to waive a jury trial.
Not really, Baton Rouge judges don’t know the law and make up shite as they go. Also they are very pro criminal.
This post was edited on 9/25/25 at 11:09 pm
Posted on 9/25/25 at 11:43 pm to Ingeniero
Question for the jurist of the OT: What are the reasons you would want to waive a jury trial and what are the reasons you would want to go with a jury trial?
Posted on 9/25/25 at 11:51 pm to sleepytime
Waive: “Defense friendly” judge; if the matter seems to hinge upon a technical point of law, as opposed to a battle of attorneys framing the facts one way or the other.
Not waive: the trial is taking place in a non-conservative jurisdiction where the chances of landing a “defense friendly” jury is a strong possibility or likelihood.
There are many other nuanced reasons for one or the other as well. The above is a broad explanation based on my experience and opinion and observations.
Not waive: the trial is taking place in a non-conservative jurisdiction where the chances of landing a “defense friendly” jury is a strong possibility or likelihood.
There are many other nuanced reasons for one or the other as well. The above is a broad explanation based on my experience and opinion and observations.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 11:56 pm to sleepytime
Truly it can be boiled down pretty simply.
Pro for jury trials: you only have to convince one person out of 12.
So from there, you need to have a really good reason why it’s easier to convince one judge than to convince 1/12 barely literate EBR registered voters.
Potential reasons are:
-Publicity
-Emotion
-Complex legal issues
-Bad client, bad appearance, demeanor, unlikable
-You’re a black guy with face tats in a suburban parish
-you’re a white guy accused of a racially involved crime in an urban parish
So you have to have a good reason why. For Carver it’s simple. He was alleged to have been sitting in a car and/or driving during a rape in the back seat. I don’t do criminal law enough to know if that’s a crime but it definitely sounds like a terrible thing to do. So I get why he wants a purely legal view, because no matter what, it’s a terrible thing to do morally.
Pro for jury trials: you only have to convince one person out of 12.
So from there, you need to have a really good reason why it’s easier to convince one judge than to convince 1/12 barely literate EBR registered voters.
Potential reasons are:
-Publicity
-Emotion
-Complex legal issues
-Bad client, bad appearance, demeanor, unlikable
-You’re a black guy with face tats in a suburban parish
-you’re a white guy accused of a racially involved crime in an urban parish
So you have to have a good reason why. For Carver it’s simple. He was alleged to have been sitting in a car and/or driving during a rape in the back seat. I don’t do criminal law enough to know if that’s a crime but it definitely sounds like a terrible thing to do. So I get why he wants a purely legal view, because no matter what, it’s a terrible thing to do morally.
This post was edited on 9/25/25 at 11:58 pm
Posted on 9/26/25 at 2:46 am to Ingeniero
Can’t the prosecution seek a jury?
Posted on 9/26/25 at 5:46 am to Shexter
quote:
According to court documents, the victim told East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff’s deputies that she was cleaning a room when Taylor approached her. Initially thinking he was looking for towels, she left her cleaning cart, only to return and find him masturbating
This strategy only works in the Dirty Latina Maids videos.
Posted on 9/26/25 at 6:00 am to Shexter
quote:
who was charged with 2 counts of forcible rape of his preteen neighbor
So, a child. He raped a child.
Posted on 9/26/25 at 7:11 am to BigBinBR
quote:
they don’t want an emotional jury that just wants to make sure someone gets punished.
And the demographics of EBR
Posted on 9/26/25 at 7:13 am to davyjones
quote:
Not waive: the trial is taking place in a non-conservative jurisdiction where the chances of landing a “defense friendly” jury is a strong possibility or likelihood.
He’s white in EBR, he won’t get this benefit when his co-defendants are black and did the physical raping. They’ll want him to go down
Posted on 9/26/25 at 7:14 am to Alt26
quote:
Yep. There are likely going to be a lot of unflattering things come out about the deceased. I couldn't imagine, as a parent, having to listen to that about my dead child. From a defense strategy standpoint it probably makes sense to try it to the judge. The alleged facts are ugly. Attractive young female allegedly raped and left alone where she was ultimately killed. All trials such as these are emotional. But it's easier to play on the emotion of 12 members of the community vs a judge who has to hear about bad things every day.
Haven’t they ruled that her sexual history isn’t relevant?
At the end of the day whether she “wanted it” or not. She was an intoxicated female who cannot consent and they left her basically to die on the road.
These boys are fricked.
This post was edited on 9/26/25 at 7:15 am
Posted on 9/26/25 at 7:15 am to Spankum
quote:
As it should be…there is enough blame to go around to everyone involved.
Not sure how the victim can have any blame in this situation. Yikes what a statement.
Posted on 9/26/25 at 8:49 am to Townedrunkard
Gail Horne Ray will surely be taken off this case.
She’s already ruled that some evidence can be used in the trial only for an appellate court to rule that it can’t. So she’s already seen evidence that can’t be used but will surely influence her judgement.
She’s already ruled that some evidence can be used in the trial only for an appellate court to rule that it can’t. So she’s already seen evidence that can’t be used but will surely influence her judgement.
Posted on 9/26/25 at 8:50 am to whoa
quote:that is precisely why the DAs office is attempting to have her removed from the case
So she’s already seen evidence that can’t be used but will surely influence her judgement.
Popular
Back to top


3





