Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
CRYSTAL MANGUM TRIAL; December 2010
Topic Started: Nov 29 2010, 12:59 PM (56,629 Views)
~J~ is in Wonderland
Member Avatar
~J~ is in Wonderland
OT

Wow. RT "@josh_ellis : N&O reporting that former Governor Mike Easley's law license has been suspended: http://ow.ly/3qrxY #NCPOL"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
Funny thing, our friend that sat in court, sat behind the N&O's reporter in the courtroom and he said she was reading the Herald Sun the entire time (on her laptop) when she wasn't typing.




. :uhoh:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
Here's a VIDEO of Crystal, for anyone interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS5BxVqmF5c


Had a better one, I think the file got zapped though.




. : Des Bea
Edited by Mason, Dec 16 2010, 04:10 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kerri P.
Member Avatar

McCullough: Arson is general intent crime. Tell jury that disregard for plain, strong likelihood of substantial harm is enough to convict.
less than 10 seconds ago via TweetDeck
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Kerri P.
Dec 16 2010, 03:55 PM
The jury says it is split on malicious intent regarding first-degree arson charge. They're leaving now while Jones, lawyers talk.
half a minute ago via TweetDeck

http://twitter.com/MillikenTHS#

.Wow. RT "@josh_ellis : N&O reporting that former Governor Mike Easley's law license has been suspended: http://ow.ly/3qrxY #NCPOL"
So I suppose they can rationalize that she was doing laundry in the bathtub, accidentally dropped the lighter when she really meant to put in the Tide and then all hell broke loose so she just decided to close the door and eat a little pizza.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
~J~ is in Wonderland
Member Avatar
~J~ is in Wonderland
Deleted-someone already posted same.

Please explain what the jury is asking now.
TIA
Edited by ~J~ is in Wonderland, Dec 16 2010, 04:02 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kerri P.
Member Avatar

McCullough, Judge Jones concur that malice in fifth arson element is either/or: EITHER specific intent to destroy/cause great damage...

less than 10 seconds ago via TweetDeck
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DukieInKansas

MikeKell
Dec 16 2010, 03:38 PM
I'd go over but my inability to control my sense of contempt for the system could get me in more trouble than it is worth at this stage, because I would likely make an outburst in court no matter what the verdict turned out to be. NFW! I would shout if found not guilty! (no way, that is, with the F as an intensifier)... BFT! I would shout if found guilty ('Bout Time, with the F again serving its adverbial role).

If it were directly about the boys, I'd try to behave well enough to be in the courtroom, but with this false accuser, and the system that supports her, I just shouldn't chance bringing a negative light on all our good work just because I lack self control.

So close (I can see the courthouse from my office window), but so far away.
I'd chip in toward any fines you get. :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kerri P.
Member Avatar

…OR wanton disregard for plain and strong likelihood of such harm. Jones is almost ready to recall the panel.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

Kerri P.
Dec 16 2010, 03:59 PM
McCullough: Arson is general intent crime. Tell jury that disregard for plain, strong likelihood of substantial harm is enough to convict.
less than 10 seconds ago via TweetDeck
In the discussions for putting in the wording to element 5 the defense wanted the more legalese wording out in rather than the more common language wording. After discussion everyone agreed to the more legal language. This is what might be confusing the jury now. The ADA will request simplification of the language. I believe the judge will agree.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kerri P.
Member Avatar

Jury returning now.
less than a minute ago via TweetDeck
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Mason, that video brings back a lot of memories. There were times the great videos were showing up on LS daily. It kept us all going and committed to RDC. Thanks for posting this one.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeZPU

At least a hung jury would allow them to re-file charges.

I hope the jury members who see it as first degree arson stick to their guns (metaphorically speaking.)
Edited by MikeZPU, Dec 16 2010, 04:07 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kerri P.
Member Avatar

Jurors have another question. They have not even left box.
half a minute ago via TweetDeck

Are these people dumber than a pile of @@@@@?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
MikeKell
Dec 16 2010, 03:38 PM
I'd go over but my inability to control my sense of contempt for the system could get me in more trouble than it is worth at this stage, because I would likely make an outburst in court no matter what the verdict turned out to be. NFW! I would shout if found not guilty! (no way, that is, with the F as an intensifier)... BFT! I would shout if found guilty ('Bout Time, with the F again serving its adverbial role).

If it were directly about the boys, I'd try to behave well enough to be in the courtroom, but with this false accuser, and the system that supports her, I just shouldn't chance bringing a negative light on all our good work just because I lack self control.

So close (I can see the courthouse from my office window), but so far away.
.
I am still stuck on the point of where is the Social Justice that 40 souls are processed through a criminal courtroom in one day for ALL the cases in the courtroom nextdoor, but Crystal, who has virtually no redeeming qualities, gets 8 days for Jury Selection and personal instruction and coaching.

And all they did was try to disqualify every piece of evidence in an indiscriminate manner.


.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply