Sex Offender Registries, Sex Offenders Search, News, Info and Discussion

  
Home | Sex Offender Registry | Megan's Law | Forums (Message Boards) | News Archive
AMBER Alert | Law Enforcement Agencies | Directory of Sites | Polls | Library | Glossary | More Resources                             Login | About Us

Top Posters Since October 2003
dp14000+
orolan4000+
Navigatr12500+
Silvert...2500+
1dadof52500+
Valerie2000+
steve1500+
victori...1000+
myoung1000+
rabbitr...750+
HPierce750+
poetsdr...750+
Renunci...750+
lj750+
fallenone500+
DoTheCr...500+
marta500+
momhelp...500+
prozac500+
rebel51500+
PVulcan250+
anti250+
rodsmith250+
LockEmUp250+
Quest250+
artie250+
KK250+
LostTime250+
TGoodman250+
amberleaf250+
deadmom...250+
brennus100+
scarlett100+
mousein...100+
thepar100+
assumpt...100+
lildrafire100+
JakeLF100+
MrTruth100+
june5100+

Newest Users
Registered within the last 72 hours.
buttwaxer
chooch
genospice
hud123
kawaski
kelstress
unknowable

Forum: Old Message Board

Thread (Discussion): "no" means "no"...or maybe "more wine?"

Switch to Flat View

In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user.

Message 118320 (In Reply to Message 118316)
Re: "no" means "no"...or maybe "more wine?"


Posted by x_losttime on Oct 17, 2003 01:09 AM | Also by x_losttime
Gender: , Age Bracket: , State: , Country:
If the
> professional testifies that the child said the rape occurred,
> it had better be consistent with the court transcripts of
> his/her interview with the child

Her interview was one on one -no court, no transcripts, no tape. Just the CPS worker and the child alone. her word alone.


> Not unless she's also a lawyer. If she is not and she sat at
> the prosecutor's table, it was as a witness.


Witnesses are not allowed in the courtroom until after they have testified and usually not even then. This is so they cannot modify their testimony based on what they hear from previous witnesses. The judge said she could not remain in the courtroom. The DA invoked a rule that allows the DA to have 1 other person at his table. This person does not have to be a lawyer. She is not. My friend tried to get a motion passed to allow his expert witness to sit in on the trial as well and was refused.


> > The DA also managed to get the mother's
> > diary, where the child said She was talking about daddy
> > putting cream on her when she was sore, supressed as hearsay
> > so the jury never saw or heard that.

> How would this help the guy? Where was he applying it? If
> you don't know, it's not clear to me why you brought this up.

His defense is that the only time he ever touched her in the pubic area was in the act of normal hygiene. Applying diaper rash cream etc. He had the daughters medical chart which showed a phone conv where the child's physician advised him to do so when she had a rash.


> > The more I hear and read about this trial the madder I get.
>
> All I can say is that neither of us is there in the
> courtroom, and even if we were, we wouldn't know everything
> necessary to make a decision. Only the jury does. I am
> confident in the ability of 12 people to come up with the
> right answer based on the evidence.

There is/was no evidence. The doctor said so. The mother said so. The one person who said so testified illegally. The appeals court agreed that she should not have been able to testify. But they declared it harmless error. This is the same appellate court that declared it harmless error when a man was convicted by a jury containing a man who did not speak english. He sat in prison until the supreme court ordered him a new trial.

http://truthinjustice.org/carlson.htm

> Why not get more information before you get angry?

No offense marta, but I have a lot of information. The people I talked to were at the trial and heard the same evidence the jurors did. My friend went to trial with the same naive confidence in the jury system you have. It cost him everything.

See an abbreviation or acronym, but don't know what it stands for? Consult the Glossary.
Switch to Flat View

Message 118316
Re: "no" means "no"...or maybe "more wine?"


Posted by x_marta on Oct 16, 2003 07:45 PM | Also by x_marta
Gender: , Age Bracket: , State: , Country:

Thread


118093, x_simon, Oct 12, 2003 03:58 PM ["no" means "no"...or maybe &qu...]
      118098, x_SurvivorForeve, Oct 13, 2003 02:19 AM [Re: "no" means "no&quo...]
      118125, x_HPierce, Oct 13, 2003 08:25 AM [well considering.]
            118150, x_marta, Oct 13, 2003 11:08 AM [Re: well considering.]
      118138, x_orolan, Oct 13, 2003 10:14 AM [Re: "no" means "no"...or ...]
            118164, x_marta, Oct 13, 2003 04:36 PM [Re: "no" means "no"...o...]
                  118173, x_orolan, Oct 13, 2003 07:13 PM [Re: "no" means "no"...]
                        118192, x_marta, Oct 13, 2003 10:13 PM [Re: "no" means "no&quo...]
                              118216, x_orolan, Oct 14, 2003 12:12 PM [Re: "no" means "no...]
                                    118236, x_marta, Oct 14, 2003 04:00 PM [Re: "no" means "...]
                                          118247, x_orolan, Oct 14, 2003 07:31 PM [Re: "no" means &...]
                                                118252, x_marta, Oct 14, 2003 08:41 PM [Re: "no" means...]
                                                      118265, x_losttime, Oct 15, 2003 05:11 AM [Re: "no"...]
                                                            118267, x_marta, Oct 15, 2003 09:36 AM [Re: "no"...]
                                                                  118303, x_losttime, Oct 16, 2003 01:53 AM [Re: "no...]
                                                                        118316, x_marta, Oct 16, 2003 07:45 PM [Re: "n...]
                                                                              118320, x_losttime, Oct 17, 2003 01:09 AM [Re: &...]
                                                                                    118334, x_marta, Oct 17, 2003 08:06 PM [Re: &...]
                                                      118312, x_orolan, Oct 16, 2003 12:33 PM [Re: "no" m...]
                                                            118317, x_marta, Oct 16, 2003 07:48 PM [Re: "no"...]
                                                                  118325, x_orolan, Oct 17, 2003 11:35 AM [Re: "no&q...]
                                                                        118335, x_marta, Oct 17, 2003 08:19 PM [Re: "n...]
                                                                              118339, x_orolan, Oct 17, 2003 09:45 PM [Re: &qu...]
                                                                                    118347, x_marta, Oct 19, 2003 04:57 AM [Re:]
                                                                                          118351, x_orolan, Oct 19, 2003 06:56 PM [Re:]
                                                                                                118358, x_marta, Oct 20, 2003 01:01 PM [Re...]
                                                                                                      118361, x_orolan, Oct 20, 2003 02:31 PM [...]
                                                                                                            118365, x_marta, Oct 20, 2003 06:13 PM [...]
                        146015, Rejected
                  118188, x_losttime, Oct 13, 2003 08:29 PM [Re: "no" means "no&quo...]
Forum Home | Top of Thread
Tell a Friend about this page.
Copyright 1998-2007 SexCriminals.com and Befriend | About Site | Credits | Contact Us