Posted on 10/11/2006 1:52:56 AM PDT by abb
You're talking civil court proceedings mainly, not criminal court. Whole different ball game there. People lie like crazy in civil court and there are rarely any consequences for it. Family Law is about the worst because they're dealing with people's kids and pocketbooks. But, exactly, where was the corruption? Did your wife pay the judge off? Give the cop a blow job to change his testimony? What were the corrupt acts on the part of the court and the cop? Did you ever go to family court services? How old were your kids when this was going on?
And she will no choice except to take the stand.
I hate to even speculate about it, because the families might be holding that in reserve.
p.s. I assume you were innocent, since you weren't convicted, and because your ex sounds like a real loser. Coming in drunk at 6am with young kids in the home is not impressive.
Who in the hell do you think you're talking to?
What else Kim could have said?
It's probably something else.
That not the point. We all agree that the main goal is to get the criminal charges dismissed. What Howlin is suggesting is that the players and families will not be stop with a dismissal or not guilty verdict but will seek further vindication. That means civil court and exposing the full range of this hoax.
Not president Brodhead
Perhaps this has been discussed already, but can they have the arrest/charges removed from their record if found innocent by "findings of fact"? I read about this happening to someone after his case was dropped by a DA. The guy then went before a Superior Court Judge to plead his case.
Get a clue.
You should get one too.
Again, what do you think their chances are of being found not guilty if this goes on trial?
Right. He would not overtly demand perjury from her, and even Gottlieb probably would not. But there are certainly ways to make the point without coming out and saying it directly. You just raise a series of questions that set the person's mind in a certain direction, with no actual threats or promises.
Here's a little something to chew on: in serious cases, the DA nearly always has a meeting with the victim (for a variety of reasons). The fact that Liefong avoided meetings with Mangum and Kim is suggestive to me that he expected and directed certain things be done a certain way and wanted no possibility that he would be directly connected with those acts, hence the Gottlieb buffer. Clearly, Liefong and Gottlieb have an "understanding". How strong it is remains to be seen.
Look, I don't know WHO you are, but you're obviously not knowledgeable about these people, this case, and how the legal system works.
Reading your posts.
I've suggested numerous times that the boys file suit, possibly in their respective states, against Mangum and get her on record as to what all Nifong, Gottlieb and all the rest of them have said to her at various times with respect to her testimony, identifications and pursuit of the case. Then start an avalanche of subpoenas.
I am a duly sworn officer of the court; I'll be more than glad to serve them all.
Maybe your reading comprehension is lacking?
Cause I am pretty sure I am well aware of the facts of this case.
What exactly do you think I am not aware of?
I'm glad they sounded forceful. Sounds good. Hope they put it up on the WRAL site.
You're obviously not aware of the TYPE of people we're dealing with her.
These people ARE going to reclaim their reputations and lives -- and if they have to destroy Nifong to do it, so be it.
And for starters they NEED a trial to do it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.