Search results

<modsnip> In my opinion, she just isn't testifying to everyone's preference. Unless, she admits to having done the crime and says DM did it and she knows everything people will be unhappy. I don't condone her actions or her mannerisms, but her conscience isn't going to help keep out of prison...

Yes she has a very involved father and no she doesn't have daddy issues, her family is extremely hard working, her father is probably at work.

She did not start her testimony screaming that she was abused and asking for sympathy. It came out that he hit her after she was asked by the defence. She even said he wasn't amazing but he also wasn't terrible.

IMO, having sympathy for a witness who was a possible victim of an abusive relationship has nothing to do with siding with the accused. It's not a choice between her or TB. I feel extremely horrified by the murder and disgusted with the actions of the accused. However, MM is not on trial. While...

Abuse is a back and forth between good and bad. The problem is that the good can be bad but just look good in comparison. For example, if you were beaten by your partner being taken out to a party feels like you are being treated well in comparison to being beaten. For some victims of abuse, not...

I found this Wikipedia article on witness credibility extremely helpful: There are many tools for assessing the credibility and reliability of a witness' testimony:[1] Internal inconsistencies: consider the inconsistencies with previous statements or testimony at trial. External...

There is evidence that people who play violent video games are more inclined to become aggressive after playing them. However, the actual chances of someone committing violence after playing violent video games is dependent on the person themselves (like their upbringing, their personality...

As far as I understand, all the stuff about the pregnancy test and him abusing her and trying to get her to go into stripping/prostitution isn't relevant to the verdict since the accused cannot be convicted of murder based on that. The relevant information she provided was she corroborated the...

Ask yourself why she is agreeing that she was physically abused? Yes, DM can lie but why would she corroborate DM's lies? She doesn't seem to be throwing MS under the bus.

I expect Dungey to call MM a liar for claiming that she was abused, reference the testimony by others that he treated her well and go back to what he said earlier about MS helping her get out of another abusive relationship and drug problems. This whole abuse thing is making me really really sad.

This isn't a domestic violence case so she's not required to provide proof that she was abused. The defence probably did find this information out from DM and this is being used to prove MS was capable of violence and thus capable of killing TB. IMO

In serious cases with high penalties the general rule is the judge appointing a lawyer for the accused. For example, Basil Borutski he's accused of killing three former partners in one day is being appointed a lawyer by the court because him not having a lawyer would be bad. Here's the attorney...

This was probably the exception not the rule. I'm sure if she's testifying she was offered protection of some sort.

Because her testimony does not do anything for the crowns case.

Perfectly ethical. It doesn't matter what a lawyers opinion is on their clients guilt or innocence, they were hired to protect their clients rights and defend them to the best of their ability. In any job, one has to deal with nasty people or people they do not agree with but they can't just...

A couple of comments on your post: 1. Capital punishment doesn't reduce crime rates, it's been proven over and over again. In any context there is a number of criminals. It's not possible to get rid of all the criminals. Paraphrasing the theory of Emile Durkheim, even in a group of saints...

Juicing means getting drunk off alcohol.

Really interesting discussion on memory and witnesses in the last thread. I'd like to continue it. One of the posters in the last thread mentioned that the testimony of witnesses is pretty unrealiable and for the most part this is true. People tend to analyze the crime and think about it and...

Yeah, because in that trial he is innocent until proven guilty. The idea is that just because he was convicted of murdering one man does not mean he also murdered another. If the courts did that then people could be scapegoated and multiple murders attributed to a person who did not commit it.

I see these kinds of comments a lot on Twitter. If proper legal procedures are not followed during a trial, the defence can use that as grounds for appealing the verdict which could result in a new trial being ordered or the verdict being overturned. So, while I understand it's frustrating for...