- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Madison Brooks case: Defense's new motion
Posted on 10/21/23 at 8:02 am to JDPndahizzy
Posted on 10/21/23 at 8:02 am to JDPndahizzy
I was the foreman on a prominent rape trial that lasted 5 days. One of the witnesses the defense called, was the victims ex boyfriend. The defense was trying to argue that the victim liked to have a lot of sex and liked it rough. It was a very weird and obviously sensitive subject for the judge. I wanna say we left the court 3 times during that 30 minute or so questioning. It was apparent that the defense had a veeeery thin line of how they could question that witness and they were skating the line. We found the guy guilty after 9 hours of deliberation (had 2 holdouts that thought he might be guilty but didn’t deserve the mandatory 25 years to Life in GA)
Point being, sexual history can play a big role in a rape trial pertaining to injuries and the defendant claim she wanted sex and lied after. It’s tough though, because her past shouldn’t necessarily impact the rape event
Point being, sexual history can play a big role in a rape trial pertaining to injuries and the defendant claim she wanted sex and lied after. It’s tough though, because her past shouldn’t necessarily impact the rape event
This post was edited on 10/21/23 at 8:04 am
0
Posted on 10/21/23 at 8:11 am to Stexas
quote:
Is she still alive? Is it 2005 again?
She’s still annoying but is much less obnoxious than she used to be. I wish she’d let her experts talk more but her info and her guests are pretty strong. I’m just happy that this case is getting national attention and she beat up on Livingston Parish for dropping the ball on the previous rape allegation 3 years before Madison. Kiran was a guest, as well.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 8:44 am to JDPndahizzy
I see what they are doing, but let’s say I fricked my gf the night before she got raped.
That doesn’t mean the other dude didn’t rape her because she had sex with me recently.
That doesn’t mean the other dude didn’t rape her because she had sex with me recently.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 8:49 am to TheSadvocate
quote:
Who the frick are these people?
Lawyers.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 8:51 am to OldManRiver
quote:
don't know. My info came directly from a sorority member. She didn't share the details of the texts, just that it's "things you never want your parents to read" and she's heard there's more out there.
I wouldn’t want my parents to read I failed a calculus test either.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 8:51 am to JDPndahizzy
Her sexual history has nothing to do with rape. That’s a sleazy dirtbag defense if I’ve ever seen one.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 9:15 am to JDPndahizzy
Now her dad has to sue AT&T as well
Posted on 10/21/23 at 9:26 am to dgnx6
quote:What if you had anal with her and it was really rough, and the anal tears happened the night you had sex. Then that is extremely relevant to the first degree rape charge the prosecution will go after
I see what they are doing, but let’s say I fricked my gf the night before she got raped.
The prosecution will use her physical injuries. The defense absolutely has reason to try and link any physical injuries to possible other encounters
This post was edited on 10/21/23 at 9:30 am
Posted on 10/21/23 at 9:27 am to DeafJam73
quote:Her sexual history doesn’t matter, but if she had previous rough sex not long before the night the rape occurred than her physical sexual injuries or tears can possibly be linked to previous sexual encounters and not the night the alleged crime occurred
Her sexual history has nothing to do with rape. That’s a sleazy dirtbag defense if I’ve ever seen one.
People need to realize the prosecution isn’t just going after a third degree rape charge(inability to consent due to being inebriated), they are going after a first degree rape charge as well
This post was edited on 10/21/23 at 9:32 am
Posted on 10/21/23 at 9:47 am to JDPndahizzy
I honestly don’t know how her dad hasn’t gone all Law Abiding Citizen by now. This has got to be torture.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 1:14 pm to JDPndahizzy
Defendants should have just done the Lotion Motion and they wouldn't have had to worry about all of this.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 1:21 pm to teke184
quote:
How is her sexual history relevant to them raping a woman too drunk to consent?
I get it, defense attorneys are looked down upon a lot, but they're just doing their job for their client. Everyone deserves their day in court and to be represented.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 1:29 pm to AUbagman
It sounds like they are just trying to soften the inevitable blow. Take a tour of a site like Fetlife and you'll see how somethings can change perception
Posted on 10/21/23 at 1:40 pm to lsupride87
Wow. Ok so let’s say she had rough sex just the night before. The real problem here is still the fact that she was wasted
Out of her mind and the punks took advantage of it. We will never know but I highly doubt she wanted to get gangbanged that night.
Out of her mind and the punks took advantage of it. We will never know but I highly doubt she wanted to get gangbanged that night.
Posted on 10/21/23 at 5:18 pm to JDPndahizzy
They won't be convicted by a Baton Rouge jury anyway.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News