Jump to content

McCoy's nightclub fight and the ongoing investigation

lowghen

By lowghen
in The Stadium Wall Archives

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

SectionC3 All Pro

SectionC3

Posted
Posted

 

 

The victim's testimony is worthless and any halfway decent lawyer would destroy it. And see the above post. Doing nothing doesn't make him an accomplice. As I said, there needs to be better video of the incident showing him hitting someone.

How do you know the victims testimony is worthless? At this point, nobody knows that. Yet another good reason for shady to get counsel and start his own investigation. It should be happening already.

 

Also, , Doc, I don't mean to pick on you in responding to your post. I think you are one of the most intelligent posters here, and I always enjoy reading your opinion. It's not just you, but in this instance I think A lot of the discussion is wildly speculative. We don't know who the witnesses are, and therefore we have no idea as to their credibility or lack there of. Also, we have no idea how many videos are floating around. Frankly, there are very few people who actually know what happened, and I suspect that even the people who were there and perhaps even the people who were involved don't have a full picture of what actually occurred.

Hapless Bills Fan Hall of Famer

Hapless Bills Fan

Posted
Posted (edited)

The victims' testimonies are not worthless if they match up with what other witnesses say, such as employees and patrons at the club. If the bartender or server confirms the claim that the off-duty cops were served the champagne before the others that certainly is material if it was taken from them. Witness statements are very often inconclusive and contradictory. But if statements are taken from a number of people who were at the event and for the most part they are consistent with each other then there is certainly a clarity to what happened.

 

Absolutely. But what if it's far murkier? What if the police officers bought 4 bottles of champagne (for the 3 of them) and McCoy and party bought 4 bottles of the same brand, and with alcohol-fueled vision 'hey, that's our bottle!' 'no, man, it's our bottle!'. What if people are paying cash and there's no real record of who bought what when? The bartender and servers are minding their own business, no one is really watching, shoving takes place, a punch is thrown, one party claims they were punched first, the other party claims no we were, all the employees know is a fight broke out and security bounced the responsible parties.

 

Here is the problem with the whole thing. When the 7 guys were evicted from the bar, let's say they call 911 immediately, police arrive, treat it like a crime scene which they would because there were officers involved - cordon off the area, interview people immediately or compile a witness list with names and addresses. Maybe there's physical evidence that can corroborate witnesses - blood spatter from the cuts and broken noses that can corroborate or contradict eyewitness testimony and help determine credibility. But they didn't. They drove themselves to hospital. Then next morning they filed a police report, as I understand it. Meanwhile the bar considers the incident over when the bouncers threw the seven of them out, they continue business as usual, close, the clean up crew mops the place, evidence gone. Patrons go home. No one has a list of who was there or where they live. Any witnesses that come forward in response to advertisements by prosecutor or defense will be a self-selected set.

 

So there will be a bunch of witnesses saying different things and the jury gets to sort which are most credible with little physical evidence to back it up. Plenty of room there for a good lawyer, which I think may be Doc's real point.

Edited by Hopeful
SectionC3 All Pro

SectionC3

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

Absolutely. But what if it's far murkier? What if the police officers bought 4 bottles of champagne (for the 3 of them) and McCoy and party bought 4 bottles of the same brand, and with alcohol-fueled vision 'hey, that's our bottle!' 'no, man, it's our bottle!'. What if people are paying cash and there's no real record of who bought what when? The bartender and servers are minding their own business, no one is really watching, shoving takes place, a punch is thrown, one party claims they were punched first, the other party claims no we were, all the employees know is a fight broke out and security bounced the responsible parties.

 

Here is the problem with the whole thing. When the 7 guys were evicted from the bar, let's say they call 911 immediately, police arrive, treat it like a crime scene which they would because there were officers involved - cordon off the area, interview people immediately or compile a witness list with names and addresses. Maybe there's physical evidence that can corroborate witnesses - blood spatter from the cuts and broken noses that can corroborate or contradict eyewitness testimony and help determine credibility. But they didn't. They drove themselves to hospital. Then next morning they filed a police report, as I understand it. Meanwhile the bar considers the incident over when the bouncers threw the seven of them out, they continue business as usual, close, the clean up crew mops the place, evidence gone.

 

So there will be a bunch of witnesses saying different things and the jury gets to sort which are most credible with little physical evidence to back it up. Plenty of room there for a good lawyer.

I basically agree with all of this, except I'm not sure how important physical evidence will be here. I suppose a print could help prove a bottle strike, or at least the identity of the person who will do the bottle. Maybe if the injuries are particularly significant, or if there was a lot of blood, footprints might matter. Spatter could be important to improve so much participation in the assault. Another good reason to get a lawyer and start the investigation. Edited by BuffaloPowerEye
Mr. WEO Hall of Famer

Mr. WEO

Posted
Posted

I basically agree with all of this, except I'm not sure how important physical evidence will be here. The key issues, at least from our perspective as bills fans, are the severity of the injuries and Shadys participation or lack there of in the events getting ready visitors. Maybe physical evidence to be a lot more important if there was a bottle strike and The prosecutor needed to print from the broken bottle to lick that device to a particular perpetrator. Otherwise, I'm not sure any physical evidence to put any of The victims or the alleged perps in the bar. It seems like eyewitness testimony would take care of that. Unless, of course, what happens in recess lounge truly stays in recess lounge.

Actually, maybe the physical evidence point is a better one the nightly thought. What I'm shady might be a problem for him. So to that end, spatter would matter. Same thing with shoeprints at Cetera. But I still don't think it's essential to the

 

 

Holy cow.

 

 

Maybe this post sums up this thread best

JohnC All Pro

JohnC

Posted
Posted

 

Absolutely. But what if it's far murkier? What if the police officers bought 4 bottles of champagne (for the 3 of them) and McCoy and party bought 4 bottles of the same brand, and with alcohol-fueled vision 'hey, that's our bottle!' 'no, man, it's our bottle!'. What if people are paying cash and there's no real record of who bought what when? The bartender and servers are minding their own business, no one is really watching, shoving takes place, a punch is thrown, one party claims they were punched first, the other party claims no we were, all the employees know is a fight broke out and security bounced the responsible parties.

 

Here is the problem with the whole thing. When the 7 guys were evicted from the bar, let's say they call 911 immediately, police arrive, treat it like a crime scene which they would because there were officers involved - cordon off the area, interview people immediately or compile a witness list with names and addresses. Maybe there's physical evidence that can corroborate witnesses - blood spatter from the cuts and broken noses that can corroborate or contradict eyewitness testimony and help determine credibility. But they didn't. They drove themselves to hospital. Then next morning they filed a police report, as I understand it. Meanwhile the bar considers the incident over when the bouncers threw the seven of them out, they continue business as usual, close, the clean up crew mops the place, evidence gone.

 

So there will be a bunch of witnesses saying different things and the jury gets to sort which are most credible with little physical evidence to back it up. Plenty of room there for a good lawyer.

The difference in this bar brawl from others is that some of the off-duty cops got hurt. This wasn't a case where the opposing combative parties got thrown out and each party went on their own way. One group got hurt to the extent where they took themselves to the hospital.

 

This isn't your everyday type of bar brawl. It involved off-duty police members and a high profile professional football player. So whether the authorities wanted it to be or not be it became a high profile and priority case. It also has to be remembered that the party that got hurt filed police reports. So official action had to follow.

 

This isn't an NCIS type of crime where scientific evidence is the key to the case. This is a case where witnesses are the main factor in solving (sorting out) this case. What do the parties say, what do the employees say and what do the patrons say? I don't want to jump the gun but from what I have read it doesn't seem like it is a very challenging case to solve.

 

Let the facts speak for itself. Use some common sense and the outcome will become apparent to most. According to sources the arrest warrant is imminent and the court case will be way down the line.

SectionC3 All Pro

SectionC3

Posted
Posted

The difference in this bar brawl from others is that some of the off-duty cops got hurt. This wasn't a case where the opposing combative parties got thrown out and each party went on their own way. One group got hurt to the extent where they took themselves to the hospital.

 

This isn't your everyday type of bar brawl. It involved off-duty police members and a high profile professional football player. So whether the authorities wanted it to be or not be it became a high profile and priority case. It also has to be remembered that the party that got hurt filed police reports. So official action had to follow.

 

This isn't an NCIS type of crime where scientific evidence is the key to the case. This is a case where witnesses are the main factor in solving (sorting out) this case. What do the parties say, what do the employees say and what do the patrons say? I don't want to jump the gun but from what I have read it doesn't seem like it is a very challenging case to solve.

 

Let the facts speak for itself. Use some common sense and the outcome will become apparent to most. According to sources the arrest warrant is imminent and the court case will be way down the line.

It doesn't seem like an NCIS case, but one of the prior posters made an excellent point. If I was there, and my clothes are clean, I want those clothes preserved. It may help support my point that I was not involved in kicking or punching or even near one of the victims when The blows were delivered. Again, at this point all of the discussion a speculative. But, if I'm clean in a situation like this, it doesn't hurt to be able to say so later.

SoulMan RFA

SoulMan

Posted
Posted (edited)

Shades of Marshawn ? I am getting more and more convinced, it just doesn't pay to sign big big money.

Edited by SoulMan
SoulMan RFA

SoulMan

Posted
Posted

I will never think anything different than build the line FIRST....and then insert anyone who doesn't fumble the ball. I would have been fine with any other position in that trade other than RB. I also could not stand the age difference....

YES ! YES YES YES YES YES !!

All_Pro_Bills Veteran

All_Pro_Bills

Posted
Posted

 

Absolutely. But what if it's far murkier? What if the police officers bought 4 bottles of champagne (for the 3 of them) and McCoy and party bought 4 bottles of the same brand, and with alcohol-fueled vision 'hey, that's our bottle!' 'no, man, it's our bottle!'. What if people are paying cash and there's no real record of who bought what when? The bartender and servers are minding their own business, no one is really watching, shoving takes place, a punch is thrown, one party claims they were punched first, the other party claims no we were, all the employees know is a fight broke out and security bounced the responsible parties.

 

Here is the problem with the whole thing. When the 7 guys were evicted from the bar, let's say they call 911 immediately, police arrive, treat it like a crime scene which they would because there were officers involved - cordon off the area, interview people immediately or compile a witness list with names and addresses. Maybe there's physical evidence that can corroborate witnesses - blood spatter from the cuts and broken noses that can corroborate or contradict eyewitness testimony and help determine credibility. But they didn't. They drove themselves to hospital. Then next morning they filed a police report, as I understand it. Meanwhile the bar considers the incident over when the bouncers threw the seven of them out, they continue business as usual, close, the clean up crew mops the place, evidence gone. Patrons go home. No one has a list of who was there or where they live. Any witnesses that come forward in response to advertisements by prosecutor or defense will be a self-selected set.

 

So there will be a bunch of witnesses saying different things and the jury gets to sort which are most credible with little physical evidence to back it up. Plenty of room there for a good lawyer, which I think may be Doc's real point.

And to expand a bit, a good lawyer will question the off-duty police as to why they didn't call for on-duty assistance. Or call 911. This might seem trivial but it is very important. Given their professional training of what a crime is and what a crime isn't why didn't they call the police immediately after the altercation? The defense will suggest they determined no call to the police was necessary because they felt no crime was committed. Maybe they were too drunk to know what was going on? Maybe they didn't want their wives knowing they were at a strip club? Were they guilty of DUI in driving themselves to the hospital? And the scene was wiped clean of physical evidence and there is no video from inside the club. Sure there might be eyewitnesses but how reliable are they and what did they see or hear if anything?

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...