- 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: Gasser didn't testify in McKnight case; Guilty of manslaughter
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:12 pm to PearlJam
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:12 pm to PearlJam
quote:
Exactly why it shouldn't be allowed, imo. That doesn't provide any evidence related to his actions during this incident.
In that line of thinking, and I am not any legal expert, just asking for personal understanding, if a guy has a history of domestic violence on a few occasions with past girlfriends or spouses and then a year or so down the road ends up taking that a step further and his new wife ends up dying as a result, is the prior domestic violence issue not allowed in the court case?
2
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:19 pm to Boudreaux35
Is it because prior charges that were dropped aren’t allowed and only prior convictions are?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:20 pm to Boudreaux35
Yes. Generally there is a statue allowing that evidence in domestic situations. Also, the the victim and accused's history with each other is more probative and relevant than a random past bad act.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:20 pm to MightyYat
quote:
Do you just wake up every morning and work on a spreadsheet of threads you're going to troll?
It really is sad that his whole mission in life appears to be a dumb fck on here.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:22 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:10 years prior where the charges were dismissed
Road rage and a physical confrontation at the literal same intersection
quote:Send more prejudicial than probative, but I'm willing to hear your reasoning. Why does it being at the same intersection matter?
would offer no probative value to you with a Defendant claiming self-defense?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:22 pm to tgrbaitn08
For mine there a prior incident that was admitted from a case that was dropped. It was a self defense case too.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:27 pm to tgrbaitn08
quote:
Is it because prior charges that were dropped aren’t allowed and only prior convictions are?
I have since learned that Gasser's previous charges were dropped. I guess that does add to it.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:27 pm to PearlJam
The intersection doesn’t matter other than it being cosmically coincidental, but the testimony that the prior confrontation started in traffic, was escalated by Gasser, and ended in a physical confrontation at the gas station would speak to the credibility of his claim now that despite this confrontation starting in traffic, escalating, and ending in physical confrontation, THIS one was in total self-defense.
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 12:30 pm
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:31 pm to PearlJam
quote:
Generally there is a statue allowing that evidence in domestic situations.
Why only past domestic situations? You're saying if a guy gets arrested (and charged) for beating up his 4 different male non-related nor in any sort of relationship neighbors and then does the same to a 5th neighbor but ends up killing him, you can't bring up the prior violent charges?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:32 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:which also likely makes it more prejudicial and less probative.
The intersection doesn’t matter other than it being cosmically coincidental
quote:I'm still not following on why the other incident offers anything probative related to this one? What about that incident speaks toward the self defense claim here?
THIS one was in total self-defense.
I'm not arguing, I'm really curious, as I'm not seeing it. Not saying it isn't there.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:33 pm to Boudreaux35
quote:That situation would almost certainly fall in one of the exceptions that allow prior bad acts evidence in.
Why only past domestic situations? You're saying if a guy gets arrested (and charged) for beating up his 4 different male non-related nor in any sort of relationship neighbors and then does the same to a 5th neighbor but ends up killing him, you can't bring up the prior violent charges?
Under federal rules the exceptions are that the prior bad acts can be used to show: motive, opportunity, intent, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake or accident. It can't be used to show that the person probably acted the same this time as he did last time.
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 12:38 pm
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:42 pm to PearlJam
Thanks for the explanation
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:44 pm to Boudreaux35
I'm providing generals and listed federal exceptions. I don't know la. law. It will be substantially similar to the federal rules, but there can be some important differences.
There are la. centric attys that can tell you better than I about la. treatment of character/prior bad acts evidence.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:49 pm to PearlJam
The jury in the Ronald Gasser murder trial have retired to the jury room to begin deliberations. They are considering the guilt or innocence of the Gretna man accused of the second degree murder of former NFL running back Joe McKnight.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 1:21 pm to TH03
quote:
But he would've been shot by the girl in your example. Just clarifying.
Or Gasser was recoiling to her approximate position to get away from the angry arse that threatens you in your car in a rage.
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 1/26/18 at 1:26 pm to MightyYat
If this guy walks, pretty good odds this happens again.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 1:44 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Jury in the Gasser murder trial, now in deliberations, just asked for pictures from the crime scene, measurements of the vehicles involved, crime scene reconstruction drawings and the legal definitions for Second Degree Murder, Manslaughter and Negligent Homicide.
Measurement are interesting. Gasser is in a little infinity should be almost able to touch the passenger side window with his arm outstretched. At least be within a foot. If McKnight is shot from three feet away he probably wasn’t shot while getting into the vehicle. He would have been a couple feet away.
Measurement are interesting. Gasser is in a little infinity should be almost able to touch the passenger side window with his arm outstretched. At least be within a foot. If McKnight is shot from three feet away he probably wasn’t shot while getting into the vehicle. He would have been a couple feet away.
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 1/26/18 at 1:46 pm to Boomshockalocka
quote:
Jury in the Gasser murder trial, now in deliberations, just asked for pictures from the crime scene, measurements of the vehicles involved, crime scene reconstruction drawings and the legal definitions for Second Degree Murder, Manslaughter and Negligent Homicide.
Well, it's good that the jury is doing their homework. I don't know enough on the case to give my stance...but it seems like a tough one for sure.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 1:47 pm to Boomshockalocka
GAC or manslaughter + 40...
Posted on 1/26/18 at 1:47 pm to Boomshockalocka
Sounds like they want to fond him guilty of something and they're trying to figure out which.
Page 5 of 28
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News