Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. Adriano_CSI's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Bosnian
      • Home Country:
      • Brazil
      • Current Location:
      • Brazil

    • Join Date: May 2009
    • Posts: 101
    #1

    ou're misinterpreting the law. Stevens is about inflammatory images.

    Aside from the obvious competency issues,
    where is the relevance, Ms. Gaffney?


    Well, once Your Honor
    hears the witness testimony...


    That's not what I asked.
    I asked you to tell me...


    - As we stated in our brief...
    - I read your brief.


    If that's all you've got,
    I'm going to allow the motion to quash.


    Mr. and Mrs. Rawlings, your child does
    not have to appear in this matter.

    Moving on.


    I've taken the liberty of reviewing
    the pre- and post-mortem photos of the decedent.


    I find them to be unduly prejudicial.


    Your honor, Stevens clearly states
    that relevant photographs...


    Stick it in your appeal file, Ms. Gaffney!


    Next...


    The admissibility of the wrist fracture,
    a previous injury.


    You do it.
    He's out to kill me.


    - Ms. Kibre.
    - Your Honor,


    Neer states in cases of child abuse,
    when the crime occurred in the home,

    prior injuries are relevant in establishing
    that the death was not accidental.


    Mr. Betts, I assume you want to be heard on this.

    Yes, Your Honor.


    Admission of further injuries would lead to
    juror confusion and be prejudicial to my client.

    You wanna give me some cases, Mr. Betts?


    Well, obviously, the Neer case.


    The case that Ms. Kibre just cited?



    Yes.


    You're gonna have to do better than that.


    Based on that argument, I have no choice
    but to allow the prosecution's motion.


    Reassign me. I'm hurting the case.


    - Stop making this personal.
    - Patel is making it personal.


    Because of me, we lost the Motion to Quash,
    the admissibility of the photos.


    You missed the biggest thing
    that happened in there.


    Why did Betts fold on the wrist fracture?
    Why didn't he fight us?


    - He wants it in.
    - Because it works for him.


    Stop worrying about Patel
    and worry about that.


    - If I err on the side of caution...
    - Caution?


    You're misinterpreting the law.
    Stevens is about inflammatory images.


    Exclude the autopsy photos,
    fine, but to exclude something...


    What, a picture of an adorable baby
    in the arms of her loving mother?


    Stevens appears twice in this context:


    You're misinterpreting the law.
    Stevens is about inflammatory images.


    Your honor, Stevens clearly states
    that relevant photographs...



    Is it some kind of disease? because this part inflammatory images is kind of confused.

  2. konungursvia's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Canada

    • Join Date: Mar 2009
    • Posts: 5,158
    #2

    Re: ou're misinterpreting the law. Stevens is about inflammatory images.

    No, Stevens is a judge with a famous ruling named after him, and by stare decisis, other judges must follow it if it pertains to their case. Here they are referring to the judgment by the name of the judge.

  3. Adriano_CSI's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Bosnian
      • Home Country:
      • Brazil
      • Current Location:
      • Brazil

    • Join Date: May 2009
    • Posts: 101
    #3

    Re: ou're misinterpreting the law. Stevens is about inflammatory images.

    Im not sure about it . How about this part "You're misinterpreting the law.
    Stevens is about inflammatory images."

  4. konungursvia's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Canada

    • Join Date: Mar 2009
    • Posts: 5,158
    #4

    Re: ou're misinterpreting the law. Stevens is about inflammatory images.

    It means: "you don't understand the text of the case law. The Stevens precedent deals with images which are harmful.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •