ST Alpha - "Why is there no mention of maybe grilling the guy who had possession of bullets that weren't supposed to be on set or in the gun that killed someone? -- nm" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Login
Create Account

Search Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...

RSS Feed

Hosting by DigitalOcean

Support ST on Ko-Fi

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 152

In response to "Alec Baldwin's manslaughter case tossed out -- (link)" by Reagen

Why is there no mention of maybe grilling the guy who had possession of bullets that weren't supposed to be on set or in the gun that killed someone? -- nm

Posted by Max Jul 12 '24, 16:18

(No message)

Responses:

Looks like it didnt even get that far. Prosecution withheld, toast. -- nm - budice Jul 12, 16:21 16
- But I mean apparently the judge - a bullet expert? - thinks they look like they could be the same, so maybe he could order something? -- nm - Max Jul 12, 16:28 15
  - Not his responsibility to do the prosecution's job for them. -- nm - znufrii Jul 12, 16:33 14
    - this is such an embarrassing loophole in the justice system. -- nm - Max Jul 12, 16:45 13
      - I mean not really? It’s how the system should work. Prosecution deliberately misfiled evidence so the defence couldn’t access it. - mafic Jul 12, 17:08 12
        
        Shouldn't the system work in a way that any officer of the court - especially a *judge* - can see that you have evidence someone was possibly responsible -- (edited) - Max Jul 12, 17:17 11
        
        he's not saying "not my job" he's saying "the prosecution screwed up so badly I can't salvage anything." -- nm - mafic Jul 12, 17:32 2
        
        I'm not saying salvage anything related to Baldwin, I'm saying what the article lays out makes it sound like Teske should be potentially charged. -- nm - Max Jul 12, 17:37 1
        
        Because nobody has heard of him. How are you going to advance your career prosecuting people nobody knows? - the wrong element Jul 12, 20:35
        
        the problem with Brady material (usually) is it only encompasses evidence that is exculpatory to the defendant. so then prosecutors have to decide - hollywood big shot Jul 12, 17:25 6
        
        To reframe what I'm saying above, if it's not the judge's job, why is he suddenly responsible for determining that the bullets are exculpatory -- (edited) - Max Jul 12, 17:49 3
        
        Because the judge's job is to rule on questions of law, not prosecute crimes. -- nm* - znufrii Jul 12, 18:19
        
        I guess on the procedural question because it’s not the judge’s job to make the decision, but it is the judge’s job to review any decision they make. -- nm - mafic Jul 12, 18:10
        
        Best guess is it directly contradicts the prosecution’s story about where they came from, which is part of how they’re framing responsibility. -- nm - mafic Jul 12, 18:07
        
        prosecution decided to file the evidence under a different case so the defence would never find it. - mafic Jul 12, 17:36 1
        
        By filing it under a different case they didn't have to turn it over to the defense or let them know it even existed. -- nm - . Jul 12, 22:26
        
        The onus is on the prosecution to play by the rules, which state the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. By playing fast and loose - Will Hunting Jul 12, 17:23

Post a message top

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.