I don't think she's an ideal witness at all. But if she is really going to say that George told her it WAS an accident (not that he THOUGHT it was an accident), it would be worth it for the defense to bring her in. Of course, IIRC her prior statement to LE was more like he THOUGHT it was an accident--if so, it would not be worth it to bring her in because she will be impeached with the prior statement.
Aggravated manslaughter of a child, 13-30 years.
But the defense is working hard to convince the jury of 1st degree murder. They may yet succeed.
HHJP has the "final say" on the verdict in the sense that he can determine that a guilty verdict is unsupported by the evidence and direct a verdict of not guilty. But really the jury has the final say on guilt vs. innocence. As for the penalty phase, the jury provides a "recommendation" and HHJP really does have the final say.
HHJP cannot consider information that was not presented in court.
No. (Short answer because multiple longer answers can be found by searching the lawyer threads.
![Smile :) :)]()
)
IMO this is an overstatement, but the predictions that JB will lose his license are a drastic overstatement in the opposite direction.
Repeated violations of the
same order in front of a judge who is already ticked off with you are likely to result in some serious (but not disbarment-level serious) consequences.
A fine, perhaps a few days in jail if HHJP hasn't cooled off by then, probably a censure letter from the state bar.