| CRYSTAL MANGUM TRIAL; December 2010 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 29 2010, 12:59 PM (56,606 Views) | |
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:32 PM Post #931 |
|
# Jones to forewoman: "I have your note." He reads it. less than 10 seconds ago via TweetDeck # The jury is now seated. less than 20 seconds ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:33 PM Post #932 |
|
Jurors were seeking clarification of willful and wanton disregard for the strong and plain likelihood of destruction or substantial damage. less than 5 seconds ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| Joan Foster | Dec 17 2010, 04:33 PM Post #933 |
|
But...ummm..it's just being dealt with today. That helps a lot regarding influencing/intimidating the jury. This city is a farce. How do they unring a bell that clanged in front of the jury all week? |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:33 PM Post #934 |
|
Jones: "For a burning to be malicious in the law of arson, it must simply be done voluntarily, without justification or excuse, and without… less than 5 seconds ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:34 PM Post #935 |
|
"…any bona fide claim of right. An intent or animus against either the property itself or its owner is not an element of arson. … less than 20 seconds ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:34 PM Post #936 |
|
J: "So I hope that helps and ask you to resume deliberating. If you have further questions of me on this point or any other on this point" less than 20 seconds ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:35 PM Post #937 |
|
# Jones: "I read you earlier the instruction that said the element of malice requires either a specific intent to cause destruction or… half a minute ago via TweetDeck # The jury asks Jones to repeat the instruction, which he does. less than a minute ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:35 PM Post #938 |
|
"…substantial damage to the dwelling comma or an act done in wanton or willful disregad of the plain and strong likelihood of such harm." less than 20 seconds ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| retiredLEO | Dec 17 2010, 04:36 PM Post #939 |
|
Not guilty, he seems to be wanting to confuse the jury even more then they already are. How about just saying willful and wanton diregard of life or property. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:36 PM Post #940 |
|
# Jones: Intent or animus vs. property or owner is not part of the law of arson. The jury is returning to its room now. less than 5 seconds ago via TweetDeck # Jones: Act must be done voluntarily without justification or excuse or any modified claim of right. less than 20 seconds ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:37 PM Post #941 |
|
# The jury room door is closed. Jones: "All right. Step back in State vs. Mangum and back to the — my court reporter needs a break." less than 20 seconds ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| chatham | Dec 17 2010, 04:37 PM Post #942 |
|
I think that instruction will help. Arson is the crime of lighting a fire with no other intents involved. If the building burns down, fine. If the building does not burn down, no difference. Same fire. |
![]() |
|
| Mason | Dec 17 2010, 04:37 PM Post #943 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. What If I wanted to burn my girlfriend's bedroom (just her belongings in that room) and not hurt her - but I end up burning down the Apt. Complex and I didn't know her Cat was under the bed. My intention was only to burn all her belongings. No one would listen to that Defense for a minute. . Edited by Mason, Dec 17 2010, 04:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 17 2010, 04:37 PM Post #944 |
|
Jones puts the court at ease until further notice. He had joked about resuming tomorrow morning. half a minute ago via TweetDeck |
![]() |
|
| retiredLEO | Dec 17 2010, 04:38 PM Post #945 |
|
They might in Durham |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |






3:32 AM Jul 11