Replies: 33
| visibility 1
|
Editor [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43486
Joined: 12/12/12
|
Campus Update: Howard's Rock Trial: Defense closing argument
Jul 23, 2015, 11:51 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22965]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 25005
Joined: 6/24/99
|
Judging solely from news reports....
Jul 23, 2015, 11:54 AM
|
|
it should take the jury about 15 minutes to arrive at a verdict.
the unknown aspect will be the penalty assessed.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1950]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 2548
Joined: 9/12/04
|
I hope that's the case, but David Hood tweeted earlier
Jul 23, 2015, 12:38 PM
|
|
"Just my view, but state has to hit a home run in closing or this could go Micah Rogers' way"
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Interesting dilemma for the jury ...
Jul 23, 2015, 12:56 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3257]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7167
Joined: 7/27/99
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [603]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 10/10/00
|
He is not charged with that! The jury cannot make up
Jul 23, 2015, 3:09 PM
|
|
charges that they think he is guilty of. He was charged with MI > $10K. Jury finds him either guilty of that charge or not guilty of that charge.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [51531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43078
Joined: 8/10/04
|
What a weak defense.***
Jul 23, 2015, 11:55 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55408]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58407
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: What a weak defense.***
Jul 23, 2015, 2:03 PM
|
|
I agree!!! If Micah wasn't willing to take the stand and confess his innocents in such a simple case, to me he is guilty. If I was on the jury he would be guilty bc his only reason for not testifying in his on defense was bc he didn't won't to get caught up in his own lies that he has told. A liar will forget what they have said and how they told their lie. When you are telling the truth, the truth can be repeated time after time bc the truth is easy to repeat, it's the only story you know to tell.
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [603]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 10/10/00
|
I guess no mayonaise for Epps
Jul 23, 2015, 2:31 PM
[ in reply to What a weak defense.*** ] |
|
but maybe some for his client..... if you know what I mean
he is a homosexual!!! and drinks Zimas!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2550]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1918
Joined: 2/23/99
|
Jury's not going to like the "common as dirt" comment.***
Jul 23, 2015, 11:57 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2537]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3389
Joined: 8/5/13
|
"common as dirt" - the point IS, it's NOT THEIR DIRT TO TAKE!!!!
Jul 23, 2015, 12:09 PM
|
|
It's our beloved rock, and it has great value to us here at Clemson!
Like & agree with the Rebel Flag or not, it's like folks going flag-snatching, stealing, & vandalizing. (Things that don't belong or mean anything to them)
It's plain wrong! Don't downplay what it means to those who care!!!
The lawyer is certainly a coot....smdh
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6781]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5464
Joined: 8/14/03
|
Re: "common as dirt" - the point IS, it's NOT THEIR DIRT TO TAKE!!!!
Jul 23, 2015, 12:33 PM
|
|
The point of that argument isn't that he's not guilty, but not guilty of Grand Larceny which is 10,000 or more. If the Jury decides he's not guilty its not going to be because they don't believe he did it but because hes not guilty of what hes charged of. The prosecution made a compelling case he did it, so disputing the value is really important for the defense.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1738]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 966
Joined: 7/12/99
|
Or, maybe...
Jul 23, 2015, 12:31 PM
[ in reply to Jury's not going to like the "common as dirt" comment.*** ] |
|
Local residents who have never touched the rock or been photographed with it, likely means they:
1. Are either not sports fans and don't care about the rock, or it's value. 2. Are fans of another (probably regional) team like USC, Georgia and will happily give a bye to someone who destroyed an important piece of our tradition. 3. Are Clemson fans who lied about their allegiances so they could could get the chance to nail this guy. 4. Are truly impartial.
Call me a cynic, but I think 4 is the least likely.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55408]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58407
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: Or, maybe...
Jul 23, 2015, 2:07 PM
|
|
Maybe the jury should been asked if they were coot fans. That is the only people in this state they are You either Clemson, or you are a recent A$$ whipped coot!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5057]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5911
Joined: 11/28/12
|
Common As Dirt ???? ----
Jul 23, 2015, 12:36 PM
|
|
Then I guess his that fancy car of his is as common as a toaster or an iron. I guess that big house he stays in is as common as a 2x4...or if I really wanted to be nasty about its as common as that chicken coupe in Columbia.
If you trying to damage Howard's Rock, then you might as well be a member of ISIS!
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60228]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42556
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Hank Aaron's 715th HR baseball - worth about $6
Jul 23, 2015, 1:00 PM
|
|
"it's just an old baseball, there are millions of them in existence."
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17626]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11052
Joined: 10/13/08
|
Re: Hank Aaron's 715th HR baseball - worth about $6
Jul 23, 2015, 1:47 PM
|
|
Too bad you weren't on the prosecution team Scooter. That would have been a great comeback.
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [976]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 1836
Joined: 10/13/00
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
I mean look at the size of him***
Jul 23, 2015, 2:13 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [51531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43078
Joined: 8/10/04
|
What kind of punishment comes with
Jul 23, 2015, 1:01 PM
|
|
malicious damage injury 2k or less? That's probably what it's gonna be.
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [603]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 10/10/00
|
He isn't charged with that. He is either guilty or not
Jul 23, 2015, 1:23 PM
|
|
guilty of the charges levied against him.
Prosecution doesn't have to prove out right that he did it. They have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it. Defense just has to shed some kind of doubt that he did it.
Like, that it was already done and he was only there to take a picture of the scroll of honor and nothing more.
The jury can't change the charges.
The jury can believe that he did it, then believe that the Rock is not valued greater than $2K and they will have to come to the conclusion that he is not guilty of the charge.
That is why they argued the value of the Rock. If it isn't worth over $2.5K, then it is not a felony grand larceny and also the malicious damage to property over $10K would be knocked out too.
His defense is two fold: 1 - the rock and damage don't amount to felony charges therefore acquit. 2 - the picture is the true reason for being there to cause reasonable doubt.
The problem is that he never said that he didn't do it. So I think the jury will reason that the picture does not in itself provide any reasonable doubt that he did it and it will hinge on the belief of the value of the Rock and the damage to it and the case to determine if he is guilty of these charges or if he should be charged with a lessor crime if the prosecution wants to press charges.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [51531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43078
Joined: 8/10/04
|
Thank you***
Jul 23, 2015, 1:32 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [976]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 1836
Joined: 10/13/00
|
Of course the Rock isn't worth much to gamecock Eppes***
Jul 23, 2015, 1:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
MONA LISA is just linseed oil & pigment smeared on canvas
Jul 23, 2015, 1:07 PM
|
|
... thus it has no value ...
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [580]
TigerPulse: 55%
Posts: 1142
Joined: 1/31/15
|
Re: Campus Update: Howard's Rock Trial: Defense closing argument
Jul 23, 2015, 1:52 PM
|
|
As a criminal defense lawyer for the last 20 years, I think you will all be very surprised with this verdict. It is always very difficult to tell what a jury is going to do and especially when you're not there to hear everything that the jury hears and also what they do not hear.
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [603]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 10/10/00
|
so true. we have no idea. TNET would say guilty tho***
Jul 23, 2015, 2:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40929]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42947
Joined: 11/30/98
|
He is guilty. I have zero doubt.
Jul 23, 2015, 2:23 PM
|
|
Guilty and guilty in the eyes of the law are two different things. There is no telling what the judge instructed the jury. You can have rock solid evidence and the judge can tell you not to use the evidence because of whatever he wants to. Most lawyers have their judges. This might be coot epps' judge.
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [603]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 10/10/00
|
That's our problem...no Rock solid evidence
Jul 23, 2015, 2:28 PM
|
|
Justice can be served in alternative ways.......
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3855]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 3201
Joined: 11/27/12
|
He would of testified but he didn't want to cry.
Jul 23, 2015, 2:30 PM
|
|
I'm ready for him to go to jail. Criminals are going to tear him up. I'd be shocked if he doesn't kill himself in jail.
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [603]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 10/10/00
|
or throw up on the Judge. He is so going to gag in jail
Jul 23, 2015, 2:33 PM
|
|
and throw up over all of his boyfriends.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55408]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58407
Joined: 7/18/07
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55408]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58407
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: That's our problem...no Rock solid evidence
Jul 23, 2015, 2:33 PM
[ in reply to That's our problem...no Rock solid evidence ] |
|
Who done the song smoke on the water, and fire in the skies? That was deep purple, wasn't it!!!
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55408]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58407
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: so true. we have no idea. TNET would say guilty tho***
Jul 23, 2015, 2:30 PM
[ in reply to so true. we have no idea. TNET would say guilty tho*** ] |
|
It's not like an innocent man to refuse to testify for himself if he really isn't guilty, and theres not a lot of other things in his record that can be brought out about the case.
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [603]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 10/10/00
|
what are you talking about? That's prejudicial anyway and
Jul 23, 2015, 2:36 PM
|
|
inadmissible.
Means they can't bring up past crimes during a trial hearing. There is only one/two criminal charges that can have prior acts admitted as evidence and that would be 2nd charge felony DUI/DWI or 2nd or 3rd drug offense.
You can bring up past records at sentencing hearings.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 33
| visibility 1
|
|
|