TheFunPolice Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 I get the sense that this is all falling apart
Rob's House Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 2 minutes ago, KD in CA said: What if I just think Brown is an a--hole and want to see him suffer? That's different. 1
unbillievable Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 Just now, TheFunPolice said: I get the sense that this is all falling apart THe lawsuit or Brown's football career?
Reed83HOF Posted September 11, 2019 Author Posted September 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: There is a child endangerment issue too?
dubs Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: No armchair here. Ladies and Gentlemen, Long Island Medium is in the house!! ps - just busting your balls or otherwise depending on your gender assigned at birth Edited September 11, 2019 by dubs
Cripple Creek Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 6 minutes ago, unbillievable said: To everyone complaining that we need to follow some kind of protocol when discussing this, like "innocence" or "reasonable doubt" This thread is literally a court of public opinion... You blew my mind!
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said: Also, for those of us who wondered if the incident had been reported to whatever police had jurisdiction, the answer per this would be: "No" Just now, Cripple Creek said: You blew my mind! An....interesting...... choice of words given the topic here
YoloinOhio Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Also, for those of us who wondered if the incident had been reported to whatever police had jurisdiction, the answer per this would be: "No" This is just regarding the one incident that took place in Pittsburgh
stevewin Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: hide raw shrimp in his curtain rods. Is this a thing?
unbillievable Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 I believe that Antonio Brown should not play this season because of what he did to the Raiders... and firmly believe he is a d-bag... ...but this woman is clearly lying. 1
whatdrought Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 13 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: In the instances you gave I believe the standard you're referring to is a 'reasonable suspicion', which is a lower standard of proof than probable cause. Man, you’re confusing my brain. ? this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause to me indicates that PC has more to do with the arresting side, not indicting and trial.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 2 minutes ago, stevewin said: Is this a thing? I sit corrected, it's shrimp dipped in caviar. Old joke. But I'd imagine raw shrimp would work, too. https://mythologystories.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/smelly-house/
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 1 minute ago, whatdrought said: Man, you’re confusing my brain. ? this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause to me indicates that PC has more to do with the arresting side, not indicting and trial. Yeah. I'm pretty sure probable cause is almost entirely limited to arrests, limited detainment and search warrants
wppete Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 What are the odds something else completely unrelated to this case comes up regarding AB this week???? I say 95% something will happen. 2
Cripple Creek Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: An....interesting...... choice of words given the topic here & one that I’m disappointed to say never occurred to me!
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 1 minute ago, wppete said: What are the odds something else completely unrelated to this case comes up regarding AB this week???? I say 95% something will happen. I would not take this bet. 7 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: This is just regarding the one incident that took place in Pittsburgh I sit corrected again.
SectionC3 Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, dubs said: Ladies and Gentlemen, Long Island Medium is in the house!! ps - just busting your balls or otherwise depending on your gender assigned at birth You can tell I’m a lawyer based on this response: Your reference to “armchair lawyers and psychics” is ambiguous. It’s unclear whether you meant “psychics” and “armchair lawyers,” or “armchair psychics” and “armchair lawyers.” Applying the rule that an ambiguity (in this instance, in a message board post) must be construed against the drafter, my response in no way can be deemed to have suggested that I am a psychic inasmuch as your “armchair” reference could have pertained only to the question whether I have earned/lucked into a law degree and licensure to a state bar. (And, for what it’s worth, I don’t believe in psychics.) 1
starrymessenger Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 7 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I think you’re looking for “corroborating” instead of “circumstantial.” E.g., evidence of physical trauma to the victim would be direct evidence of the rape and corroborate a victim’s testimony as to a rape. The corroborating evidence rule applies to accomplice testimony and confessions. Testimony of a victim, standing alone, is legally sufficient to convict in a sexual abuse/sexual assault case. That said, prosecutors are disinclined to bring a case to a grand jury (other than perhaps a child sexual abuse case) in the absence of corroborating evidence. So, technically, this case could be brought on the testimony of the victim alone. But I don’t think that will be an issue because we have the text message exchanges that corroborate at least the contention that sexual intercourse occurred. How that effects the forcible penetration element of the crime lies in the eye of the beholder, I suppose. Thank you. Whether you call it circumstantial or corroborative evidence, I confess to being surprised that a conviction can occur solely on the basis of the complainant's affirmations. The reason is that I have a hard time regarding such assertions as constituting evidence as such and, if that is correct, it would follow that a criminal conviction cannot proceed in the absence of evidence. Now maybe that's where I'm wrong. Maybe the complainant's allegations are in criminal law and in procedure regarded as evidence albeit rarely, if ever, of sufficient weight to displace the legal presumption of innocence.
SectionC3 Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 7 minutes ago, whatdrought said: Man, you’re confusing my brain. ? this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause to me indicates that PC has more to do with the arresting side, not indicting and trial. Basically correct. Probable cause to believe a crime has been committed is the threshold for arrest and (I believe) charge by complaint. The threshold for an indictment — which must supersede a complaint, at least in NYS, is legally sufficient evidence.
Reed83HOF Posted September 11, 2019 Author Posted September 11, 2019 (edited) Since this got zero responses on the previous page and a post after it did: This is the accuser (from what I can gather) in a video with AB Does this look like the Brother-Sister relationship they had in her lawsuit? Edited September 11, 2019 by Reed83HOF
Recommended Posts