And that huge ego manifested itself on the day he pulled the triggerIn my opinion, this guy’s bio screams “ I have a huge ego”.
And that huge ego manifested itself on the day he pulled the triggerIn my opinion, this guy’s bio screams “ I have a huge ego”.
Yeah ... But he was an instructor for CLEET. I'm gonna stand by my comment. He, of all people in the LE community of Oklahoma, given his position (which apparently was his ENTIRE identity given what I've seen and heard), deserves (and rightfully should be) held to that higher standard.
I have seen people argue that cops "don't deserve" to be held that higher standard when off duty. ********. He has the training and has been taught how to handle himself in situations much more problematic than being cut off (or flipped off and called a bad name) in traffic and THIS is how he chose to respond?? Yeah, nope. He's gonna get jail time. And he deserves every damned bit of it. IMHO, of course.
it probably depends on the case. I don't think a person's rap sheet can be included in the court proceedings in cases where the people involved would have had no way of knowing about the person's past (in a situation like self defense).Do you know if the jury is allowed to research the accused?
I believe the rap sheet isn’t usually admissible in court?
Isn’t it normal during sentencing to reveal it unless you have a great attorney to seal it.?
I believe a VPO can be admissible in certain circumstances. My main question is,can the jury Google the accused or can that be grounds for a mistrial?it probably depends on the case. I don't think a person's rap sheet can be included in the court proceedings in cases where the people involved would have had no way of knowing about the person's past (in a situation like self defense).
So you can't shoot a stranger and then claim you did it because of that person's past bad acts since you'd have no way of knowing about the person's past. Now if you shot someone and knew the person's history, like they had attacked you before, you could likely include it.
You can't always present evidence to blame the 'victim' (for lack of a better term) that you learned after the fact.
Nor can the prosecution present a case using past acts unless they are directly connected to the crime in question. Otherwise you might get people convicting someone because of a history of crime and not because the jury thought the person committed that specific crime.
But the court can look at the totality of the situation when it comes to sentencing.
Or at least that is what i believe i recall from conversations with an attorney friend. But i could easily be mistaken.
i'm sure prior bad acts can be included in some cases. But it's more likely dependent on the specific facts of the case.I believe a VPO can be admissible in certain circumstances. My main question is can the jury Google the accused
You can't shoot someone for having done bad things previously, especially if you have no way to knowing their past history at the time of the shooting. If you are defending yourself you have to be able to point to the threat (which again, a person's history, which was unknown to you at that time, isn't enough)I take it from this dialog, it's not ok to shoot someone even if they deserve it, based on their past criminal activity.
Ah, i remembered the term i was looking for.I’m pretty sure the victim’s past and rap sheet are almost always fully admissible.
Ya I go thatYou can't shoot someone for having done bad things previously, especially if you have no way to knowing their past history at the time of the shooting. If you are defending yourself you have to be able to point to the threat (which again, a person's history, which was unknown to you at that time, isn't enough)
Generally speaking, no. The jurors are not allowed to do any outside research; they’re only supposed to be evaluating the facts presented to them during the trial.Do you know if the jury is allowed to research the accused?
Enter your email address to join: