|
Replies: 11
| visibility 1736
|
Scout Team [198]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 110
Joined: 12/8/11
|
Howard's Rock Case
Jul 22, 2015, 9:57 AM
|
|
Im no legal expert but Ive been reading articles each day this week regarding the trial and our little buddy Micah.
It seems to me that for someone that has claimed that he is innocent of this crime there seems to be a lot of time spent on determining how much the rock is worth so that he charges could be lessened instead of proving his innocence. If it were me sitting down and I knew I didnt do it, I wouldnt care how much they valued this rock at.
I think if he would have just admitted fault and given the rock back in the beginning this could have been a lot easier for him and he could be forgiven.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [2550]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1918
Joined: 2/23/99
|
Re: Howard's Rock Case
Jul 22, 2015, 10:04 AM
|
|
A good attorney is going to do both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [338]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 1013
Joined: 9/16/11
|
Limiting the downside risk
Jul 22, 2015, 11:11 AM
|
|
By lessening the value of the rock, you obviously lower the maximum penalties the kid faces. It would be irresponsible and potentially malpractive to do otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [69017]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115868
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Howard's Rock Case- I would love to
Jul 22, 2015, 10:07 AM
|
|
be on the jury. Oh and what happened to our most recent rock vandal? Only time I ever remember the pics not getting a suspect quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4098]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 10336
Joined: 7/1/97
|
Re: Howard's Rock Case
Jul 22, 2015, 10:09 AM
|
|
sure agree BUT what he did was get a c$$t lawyer and "stonewall".. he is guilty but he will get off with about nothing! he should get @ least 5 years!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [338]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 1013
Joined: 9/16/11
|
Re: Howard's Rock Case
Jul 22, 2015, 11:13 AM
|
|
So, how is an act of vandalism worth sending a kid to jail for 5 years? Did you ever do something stupid like vandalism? How about at your school or your rival's school?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31105]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 34659
Joined: 6/22/03
|
I did. And if caught I would have been held accountable for
Jul 22, 2015, 11:29 AM
|
|
The damages.
Spray paint can be fixed. . Can't regrow a rock. The damage is permanent.
Im sure a kid who burnt down a school would get punished harsher than a kid who burnt a football field.
Btw, Mica is also NOT a kid in highschool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [105574]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44178
Joined: 12/22/08
|
His attorney has to address both sides
Jul 22, 2015, 10:10 AM
|
|
Basically, he has to say "My client is innocent, he didn't do it. Alternatively, if you believe the prosecutor and wrongly believe my client did do it, it's just a rock that is worthless so the charges should be lessened."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19683]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14938
Joined: 12/11/04
|
Clemson should trademark The Rock to help establish a
Jul 22, 2015, 10:15 AM
|
|
monetary value for future use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64885]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 89158
Joined: 3/27/01
|
You just never know what a jury might do.....
Jul 22, 2015, 10:18 AM
|
|
so the defense has to be prepared for all contingencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1740]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 967
Joined: 7/12/99
|
Defense will try to discredit the main witness
Jul 22, 2015, 12:44 PM
|
|
Any conviction will likely hinge on the jury believing the main witness, Xavia Wynn.
I'm sure Micah's dad bought him the best legal representation available.
It'll be interesting to see where the Rock valuation plays in. Do they count the overall value, or just the 15% he chunked off (which the experts valued at roughly $20,000)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [603]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 10/10/00
|
He is charged with a felony Grand larceny and malicious
Jul 22, 2015, 3:13 PM
|
|
injury to property valued over $10,000.
If they are successful in arguing the fact that the worth of the damage and property is less than $2,500, then the jury will have no choice to find him not guilty of those charges.
The jury can only find the guilt of defendant on the charges placed against him. The jury can't say well he did it, but it is only worth $100 so we will say he is guilty of a misdemeanor petit larceny and that is it.
The prosecutor can't charge him with petit larceny and grand larceny. It is either one or the other.
The prosecutor could come back and charge him with petit larceny if it was determined by the jury that it was not of a value greater than the minimum value for a grand larceny charge, but it won't do that for something that would amount to a small fine & a few days in jail.
If the whole Rock was valued at $134,000, then the part that MR broke off is valued at $16,080 or the new value of the Rock is now $117,920. The value of the damage to the case is $9,000.
So by my accounts, the prosecution has established that a piece of the Rock was stolen valued at $16,080 and intentional damage to property of $25,080 ($16,080 reduced value of Rock + $9,000 case damage).
And then with the prosecutions star witness of Winn stating that MR went over the fence and directly heard him say that he got a piece of the Rock along with all of the other circumstantial evidence, I get the feeling that the jury will have to change the "allegedly" to "beyond a reasonable doubt."
GUILTY!!
He may try to plead out before the end of the week to 1 count with no jail time and punitive money damages.
CU could also file a civil lawsuit to recoup the cost of the case and established value of the damage done to the Rock. There is a lower standard of proof for that called "beyond a preponderance of doubt" which they have already established in court thus far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 11
| visibility 1736
|
|
|
50
