- 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
2
Posted on 6/9/25 at 8:24 am to Saintsisit
Looks like AJ asking to call another dog bite expert/forensic pathologist
Posted on 6/9/25 at 8:24 am to Saintsisit
Hank is so triggered about dog bite evidence.
I thought you provided all the facts, data, and science to prove that KR hit OJO with the Lexus?
Hank is acting like the CW is on trial. Funny enough the CW should be on trial.
I thought you provided all the facts, data, and science to prove that KR hit OJO with the Lexus?
Hank is acting like the CW is on trial. Funny enough the CW should be on trial.
Posted on 6/9/25 at 8:37 am to jclem11
quote:
Hank is acting like the CW is on trial.
Well Hank is the defense attorney for the Commonwealth
Posted on 6/9/25 at 8:45 am to civiltiger07
Brennan is a little whiny bitch
Posted on 6/9/25 at 8:51 am to civiltiger07
quote:
Well Hank is the defense attorney for the Commonwealth
Posted on 6/9/25 at 8:52 am to jclem11
andddddd we're off.Posted on 6/9/25 at 9:10 am to idlewatcher
Cameraman has a weird fascination with KR. He's focused in on her for quite awhile.
Posted on 6/9/25 at 9:13 am to idlewatcher
Jackson really needs to hit on Hank's ridiculous speed statements on Friday. It drove me crazy he kept saying the speed would be 26% lower because the arm weighed 26% less. That's not how the math works. The vehicle was still going the stated speed in the tests and the arm would still hit terminal velocity because it weighed less than the SUV.
Posted on 6/9/25 at 9:18 am to MFn GIMP
He'll get to it I think. It's still early in this testimony.
Any idea how AJ got licensed to practice law in MA so quickly?
Any idea how AJ got licensed to practice law in MA so quickly?
Posted on 6/9/25 at 9:20 am to idlewatcher
quote:
Any idea how AJ got licensed to practice law in MA so quickly?
pro hac vice
He was sponsored by Yanneti
Posted on 6/9/25 at 9:36 am to OweO
quote:
That is criminal. He seems like a legit whack job.
Welcome to prosecution experts. There is an entire cottage industry of bullshite testimony to prosecute.
Posted on 6/9/25 at 9:41 am to civiltiger07
quote:
He was sponsored by Yanneti
I swear you are part of this case
You know way too many intimate details to not be Posted on 6/9/25 at 10:05 am to idlewatcher
Hank has made a single good point in a day and a half of cross/re-cross and that was the shirt ARCCA used was brand new and didn't have any wear-and-tear.
Other than that he has nothing.
Other than that he has nothing.
Posted on 6/9/25 at 10:06 am to BrewDrees95
quote:
Arcca was paid 20-50k approx for their work
The taxpayers paid welcher 400k
If I were a canton taxpayer, I would be fuming
It almost looks like the lawsuit is a charade for a slush fund because the product is utter failure and the amount of cash running through is ridiculous.
Posted on 6/9/25 at 10:10 am to winkchance
This poor guy on the stand trying is to explain physics at a level dumbed down enough to demonstrate how stupid Brennan’s questions are. It’s like he’s talking to a toddler. But in the most sincere and nice way
This post was edited on 6/9/25 at 10:13 am
Posted on 6/9/25 at 10:12 am to 10tiger
Bev is allowing rebuttal witnesses on the dog bite claim despite the CW knowing this was a part of the defense all along.
Posted on 6/9/25 at 10:21 am to AlxTgr
Hank finally shut the frick up. Good lord is that moron insufferable.
Posted on 6/9/25 at 10:31 am to AlxTgr
quote:
Bev is allowing rebuttal witnesses on the dog bite claim despite the CW knowing this was a part of the defense all along.
Isn't that the whole point of a rebuttal witness though? To respond to what the other side has said?
Posted on 6/9/25 at 10:43 am to LSBoosie
quote:Definitionally, yes. I have seen judges refuse to allow it in cases where it's obvious this was an important issue in the case and the first litigant(plaintiff or State) doesn't call their witness in their case in chief simply to get the opportunity to call them last.
Isn't that the whole point of a rebuttal witness though? To respond to what the other side has said?
Page 103 of 159
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News