Posted on 04/25/2006 2:34:48 AM PDT by abb
McFayden's email indicates he was most likely there.
I'm still hummin' that old Pringles song myself...The link is on the right.
Seligmann is in at least one of the time-stamped
photos.
As is the now embarrassed fellow described as "passed out with his shorts somewhat down".
And we can never stress to our children enough that it is possible that: If You Lay Down With Dogs. Youll Get Up with Fleas
Logical, I agree. But will that hold up in court? The prosecution has to PLACE them at the scene, either via forensics or ID. Which reminds me, did any of the players do fingerprints? Oh. And just one more thing (in my best Colombo immitation, LOL) forensics doesn't indicate a time that someone was there, does it?
It's now the fashion amongst a lot of kids to walk around with their shorts somewhat down with their boxers hanging out on top. Unless the waistband is around his knees I'm not sure this is significant.
LB, the defense don't have to release any more photos. That would be self incrimination. Which is why the investigators wanted the cameras and hard drives....
What is likely to happen is this:
1. The DC case will be continued until the NC case is over.
2. If he is convicted in NC, then he gets serious time and I doubt DC bothers with him.
3. If he pleads out in NC, then DC may go ahead. This is fair, you dont give diversion to people who already have records.
4. If charges are dropped in NC, then DC may or may not go ahead. If it looks like charges were dropped only because the witness would not testify, DC may go ahead. If it looks like he was cleared, then DC probably lets the matter drop.
5. If he is found not guilty in a trial in NC, DC probably lets the matter drop.
But it is not nothing, the DC case would give this young person a criminal record which he would not have had otherwise.
Is he the only one? Maybe that's why the defense allowed the cab driver to ID him.
As far as pringles, I am eating salt and vinegar pork skins at the present. I love these things and I'm trying to ward off the evil islamic terrorist.
When the defense first started showing the photos to news media, it's been routinely reported that the photos show additional players seated in a rough horseshoe around the dancers. These photos have not been released but simply shown to media but apparently could be used to ID additional players.
Yes, I recall that. Does the defense have to turn them over to the prosecution if they're subpoenaed? Would that be self-incrimination?
I think the prosecution has to share with the defense everything it has but not vice versa. But I'm just guessing.
You want talking out of an ass? Listen to this. Howlin said up in the thread that Nifong fixed a 2005 traffic ticket for AV.
Wonder if they have a "thing"?
How's that for ass talkin' LOL!
Have em ping me, I got it on TIVO...
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.