- 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: Garrett Wards manslaughter conviction has been vacated.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 3:48 pm to KosmoCramer
Posted on 5/3/25 at 3:48 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
I assume it was ruled inadmissible pretrial. Seems pretty probative to me if it was right before, during, or immediately after. Maybe it wasn't.
I haven't seen any evidence of a motion in limine regarding this subject. I would imagine had it been ruled inadmissible in pretrial motions the trial judge would have taken a different approach had the prosecutor defined a pre-trial motion. The trial judge viewed it as harmless error.
0
Posted on 5/3/25 at 3:58 pm to ExtraGravy
quote:
If a witness testifies he heard Ward call the victim a racial epithet, while he was beating his victim to death- why shouldn't the jury hear that?
Why shouldn't the DA ask the witness if he heard Ward say anything?
Again, it goes back to the prejudicial vs probative issue.
Does testimony about someone accused of committing a battery that suggests they used a racial epithet make the battery more or less likely to have occurred? I suggest it does not but it does potentially go to state of mind which may have a bearing. It is also a very different thing to try to turn the testimony into a racially charged rant.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 6:11 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
you generally don't see a post-conviction mistrial based on a single utterance supposedly from the defendant's mouth.
DO you even rich people? Jail is like Vietnam. The only people that have to go are blacks and poor white people.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 6:52 pm to ExtraGravy
quote:
So the actual facts of a case cannot be presented to a jury because they are just too bad for the killer's case?
The point is that it doesn’t matter what he said during the act. However saying the N word could offend the jurors enough to not evaluate the case fully and find him guilty by racism.
Hypothetical situation to help you better understand the point of this rule.
Say Ward was walking peacefully by himself and gets held up and robbed. Then during the robbery an altercation breaks out and Ward starts to beat the guy to death. While beating him he says the N word. The witness walks up during and hears that and says that during the trial.
A black jury would then not care about any facts and be stuck on the white boy saying the N word and find him guilty.
Posted on 5/5/25 at 12:47 pm to NIH
quote:
At least you’ll have your memories of ivars with him
Stickie this lol. Best comment yet.
Posted on 5/5/25 at 1:19 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Here’s a good link:
LINK
I think he’s still fricked. They can get the same conviction without the racial stuff coming out.
I read the entire thing. In summary the prosecution solicited testimony from a a witness that stated Ward used the n-word multiple times while attacking the deceased and afterward. This use of a racial epitaph made it impossible for Ward to get a fair trial of his peers warranting a mistrial.
I don't necessarily agree... but I have a bigger question.
If at the new trial the convict him of 2nd degree murder instead of manslaughter could he get more years than currently required to serve?
Posted on 5/5/25 at 6:28 pm to bdavids09
What are the odds they don’t go through a trial again and offer him a plea to something like 15 years? Also if he gets out on appeal I would seriously consider killing myself before going back to prison again
Posted on 5/5/25 at 6:48 pm to Saunson69
quote:
It's unfortunate to see a guy like Ward spending his entire prime of life 30-40 years in prison from something he has and had no recollection of.. I'll be clear that I'm not defending him, it's obvious he did it. Just a crazy situation. Odds of being a repeat offender is practically none. He was a nice guy in my encounters when sober. Obviously isn't or wasn't when drunk. They had to of paid that lawyer a shite ton to find this strategy 7 years after it happened.
Based on accounts from people I know that were there when it happened and knew him prior to, it wasn’t a surprise.
Would you say the same if someone got so drunk they don’t remember anything and killed somebody behind the wheel?
Posted on 5/5/25 at 7:02 pm to Finch
I wonder what the legal bills have been on this case.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News