Who would be charged for providing false evidence? Even if she did it, (and they didn't prove it) it was accidental, not pre meditated.Yes because it is a chargeable offense to provide false evidence.
The people in charge of the inverted video. It's a punishable crime to provide false evidence. You responded to my post about the video.Who would be charged for providing false evidence? Even if she did it, (and they didn't prove it) it was accidental, not pre meditated.
What's the crime now?You asked about the video.
It still matters. It's still a crime, whether she was convicted or not
Sorry I don't know what happened with some of my posts. Ignore where I seem to have asked the same question more than once.Who would be charged for providing false evidence? Even if she did it, (and they didn't prove it) it was accidental, not pre meditated.
Oh ok. You are talking about LE then. I don't suppose anyone will be held accountable for that. It would be LE investigating LE. Also as it was a mistrial I bet nothing happens.The people in charge of the inverted video. It's a punishable crime to provide false evidence. You responded to my post about the video.
Hopefully the FBI is on it if the CW isn't. I don't hold much hope for the CW to do anything about it since they are the ones that allowed it and all the other shenanigans to happen.Oh ok. You are talking about LE then. I don't suppose anyone will be held accountable for that. It would be LE investigating LE. Also as it was a mistrial I bet nothing happens.
Isn't this all a bit OTT just because one officer texted someone calling her a c*nt? He was describing someone he believed killed a fellow officer and drove away from the scene.And anybody found guilty that had proctor and others doing the investigating should get to have their cases looked over.
that isn't why. They thoroughly proved his lack of "investigating" in her trial.Isn't this all a bit OTT just because one officer texted someone calling her a c*nt? He was describing someone he believed killed a fellow officer and drove away from the scene.
Ok so we are talking about two issues - the reversed video and the blabbing juror.You asked about the video.
It still matters. It's still a crime, whether she was convicted or not
I didn't think the investigation of his actions is completed yet though, right?that isn't why. They thoroughly proved his lack of "investigating" in her trial.
I'm pretty sure the FBI is not done with any of them yet.I didn't think the investigation of his actions is completed yet though, right?
The jury did not get to be heard that they cleared her of murder. If they had, she would not be able to be tried again for it due to double jeopardy. The prosecutor is saying he wants to try her again for it but with all that that came out at trial, it seems to be a really dumb idea and I'm pretty sure that's the info he is trying to show everyone. Now the defense also has time now to drive further into these things and that really makes that decision a head scratcher.Not sure what is going on here but I thought the jury cleared her of murder and it was hung on the manslaughter charge resulting in the mistrial.
Now we wait for the retrial, if there is one.
I am not going to read all that stuff - what difference does it make anyway? It has all been OBE. The jury already heard all the evidence and testimony and made their decisions but could not come to a unanimous decision on one of the charges.
But thanks for taking the time to repost.
Like I said she got off on the two charges if we believe the juror reports and it was hung on the manslaughter. I think prosecution would be foolish to push any new charges again except manslaughter.The jury did not get to be heard that they cleared her of murder. If they had, she would not be able to be tried again for it due to double jeopardy. The prosecutor is saying he wants to try her again for it but with all that that came out at trial, it seems to be a really dumb idea and I'm pretty sure that's the info he is trying to show everyone. Now the defense also has time now to drive further into these things and that really makes that decision a head scratcher.