Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf


IamtheWaris wrote:I am not defending anyone but I am wondering when people say they have not done their job, what do people want them to do? Aren't two kids being held for trial trial in February?
I agree that Mike guy in the video is an absolute sleezeball and has done more punishment to himself than the law could ever do but I'm not sure what he could be charged with.

IamtheWaris wrote:I am not defending anyone but I am wondering when people say they have not done their job, what do people want them to do? Aren't two kids being held for trial trial in February?
I agree that Mike guy in the video is an absolute sleezeball and has done more punishment to himself than the law could ever do but I'm not sure what he could be charged with.


mac5155 wrote:IamtheWaris wrote:I am not defending anyone but I am wondering when people say they have not done their job, what do people want them to do? Aren't two kids being held for trial trial in February?
I agree that Mike guy in the video is an absolute sleezeball and has done more punishment to himself than the law could ever do but I'm not sure what he could be charged with.
No, the sheriff is repeatedly threatening the people who are bringing this case to light, and defending the actual criminals.

IamtheWaris wrote:mac5155 wrote:IamtheWaris wrote:I am not defending anyone but I am wondering when people say they have not done their job, what do people want them to do? Aren't two kids being held for trial trial in February?
I agree that Mike guy in the video is an absolute sleezeball and has done more punishment to himself than the law could ever do but I'm not sure what he could be charged with.
No, the sheriff is repeatedly threatening the people who are bringing this case to light, and defending the actual criminals.
To me that is just the sheriff being a POS more than anything. I understand the and agree with outrage at the police department and the entire "Big Red" crew but in terms of legal discourse I don't know specifically who else people want charged. Again I am not defending anyone just trying to figure it out as I am not as up to speed on the situation as many others. Thanks

DudeMan2766 wrote:There is A LOT of covering up going on what is ticking people off is the more that comes out (thanks to Anonymous and knightsec) the more the Sherrif and officials are going on the offensive against Anon and fighting back against them instead of using that evidence to investigate.

tifosi77 wrote:DudeMan2766 wrote:There is A LOT of covering up going on what is ticking people off is the more that comes out (thanks to Anonymous and knightsec) the more the Sherrif and officials are going on the offensive against Anon and fighting back against them instead of using that evidence to investigate.
If the evidence was brought to light via criminal activity (e.g. Anon hacking) then it might not be admissible in court.
Presumably Anon is disclosing this information in the hopes that the police will act on it. I think that means a prospective defendant would have a pretty decent case that Anon was then effectively acting as an agent of the state, whether or not the state actively engaged them, which means they would be bound to substantially the same rules of evidence as the police and prosecuting attorney would be.
I'm sure one of our in-house attorneys could explain it better (or refute what I said outright), but I believe this called the "silver platter" rule.






Letang Is The Truth wrote:What was the resolution of this?





pittsoccer33 wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2291926/She-didnt-affirmatively-say-Silence-means-consent-according-defense-Ohio-high-school-rape-trial-passed-drunken-teenage-girl-sexually-assaulted-multiple-football-players.html
This made Drudge. Not affirmatively saying no = consent says the defense. Sounds legit

When the trial commences Wednesday, there will be no jury involved. Instead, a juvenile judge will decide the fates of Trent Mays and Ma'lik Richmond, who face incarceration in a detention center until their 21st birthdays and the almost-certain demise of their dreams of playing football.


a cautionary tale for teenagers living in today's digital world.


DudeMan2766 wrote:Reporter from inside the courtroom just tweeted that a new piece of evidence was addressed today that wasnt before. They have a photograph of the girl naked from the waist down, and both defendents, one of whom is also naked from the waste down. Ruh-roh.

Users browsing this forum: Beveridge and 5 guests