-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
JJ Trial
- Thread starter bluemarlin2
- Start date
CrunchGriz
Well-known member
...and the jurors leave the courtroom at 1:10 PM.
Now we'll see how long it takes.
Now we'll see how long it takes.
Griz2k said:
In a civil trial, yes, a judge can set aside a verdict, but in a criminal trial, no.
funny water
Well-known member
GRZFTBL said:
they obviously weren't stiff enough if you could count that high..... :lol:
SouthDakotaGrizzly
Well-known member
Griz2k said:
I'm not a lawyer either, but I did sleep at an Holiday Inn Express last night. Okay, no I didn't. And I have no clue if the judge can overrule the jury's verdict. But, as I've stated before, I don't think any single person wants to be the one who decides this case. If not for the DOJ investigation, this trial never would've happened. Now that it's started, I think everyone involved wants the jury to be the ones who decide it.
Griz2k said:
I am also in no way a lawyer or legal expert but i have read that a judge can do this but only overturning a guilty verdict. They cannot overturn an acquittal. Again, I am not a legal expert so to the 90% on here that are please don't flame me if I read incorrectly.
Bias seems palpable. Anyone do a count of objections sustained for state vs overruled for defense. Lots piss poor state district judges in western MT but this looks as bad as it can get. Tell me -75, can the defense not "bump" a judge in a criminal matter like you can in the outset of a civil case?
montanaguy
Well-known member
It's appalling how the prosecution kept referring to all of her "injuries". A "1 millimeter laceration"? Seriously? That's somewhere between a pinprick and a blackhead. A tender spot on the forehead that in no way conforms to her statement that he was pushing on the BACK of her head? A vague redness on her chest? This is a kangaroo court. Presided over by a very partial judge.
JBS said:
A lot of the evidence, consisting primarily of texts, was ruled not admissible by Townsend in pretrial because its prejudicial value outweighed its probative value. This ruling was probably correct regarding most of the texts. Before the trial even started, however, some attorneys I spoke to felt Townsend clearly erred in refusing to permit some of the texts to be admitted under the transaction evidence rule (i.e. 106, where if any writings part of single transaction are admissible, all are admissible). They felt certain that if the defense lost and appealed, the Supreme Court would rule Townsend erred by not permitting those texts to be admitted. They had no idea on whether the Supreme Court would rule the error was more than harmless error requiring reversal, but they were certain she had misapplied the law on the admissibility of some of the texts.
Can not believe the Missoulian tweet stating prosecution asks the jury to follow them into the 21st century when considering rape. What a condesending and insulting statement to say to a jury.
Griz2k said:
Probably both.
missoulian @missoulian
Judge said the case defense cited said it is improper to characterize someone as liar. #johnsontrial But Thompson's use was proper.
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite More
Paoli is getting his objections on the record. I would like to know if the above tweet is accurate or just a lot of Gweno. If it is accurate, then the judge is saying that Paoli is a lier.
Judge said the case defense cited said it is improper to characterize someone as liar. #johnsontrial But Thompson's use was proper.
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite More
Paoli is getting his objections on the record. I would like to know if the above tweet is accurate or just a lot of Gweno. If it is accurate, then the judge is saying that Paoli is a lier.
