Jump to content

McCoy's nightclub fight and the ongoing investigation


lowghen

Recommended Posts

Do you genuinely NOT know what the word "Proof" means? It means indisputable evidence. He said conjecture is NOT proof. Ever.

Look, a bunch of non-lawyers arguing about legal definitions. Here is this:

 

Proof: The conviction or persuasion of the mind of a judge or jury, by the exhibition of evidence, of the reality of a fact alleged: as, to prove, is to determine or persuade that a thing does or does not exist.

 

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p184.htm

 

So it would actually be a jury that would decide whether or not the evidence of testimony would constitute proof in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Isn't it in the vast majority of cases?

Yes. Any witness testimony is evidence/proof. Jury takes all the evidence and decides what it thinks happened, and applying those facts reaches a verdict based on the law.

 

If the two off duty policemen testify that basically they were assaulted without provocation, that is sufficient evidence to convict if the jury believes them (beyond a reasonable doubt of course, which is a high standard). You don't need videotape or corroboration to convict, although if I was prosecuting the case it would be nice to have.

 

Of course if McCoy et al. testify that the cops spit in their face and that provoked what happened, that is evidence too. The jury decides what is true and not true.

 

At this point, there is very little here to illuminate who was at fault or what happened. It is all conjecture. I mean the cops have incentives to lie, e.g. not getting fired.

Edited by Casey D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, a bunch of non-lawyers arguing about legal definitions. Here is this:

 

Proof: The conviction or persuasion of the mind of a judge or jury, by the exhibition of evidence, of the reality of a fact alleged: as, to prove, is to determine or persuade that a thing does or does not exist.

 

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p184.htm

 

So it would actually be a jury that would decide whether or not the evidence of testimony would constitute proof in this case.

It's proof. The question is whether it is compelling/convincing proof, or something on which the jury calls BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Come on now...even the lowest-wage folk can scrap together $200 for a good bottle

$200? More like $2k. Bottles in Vegas ultra lounges start at like a grand.

 

Was scared to get off my flight, thought they would have found the bloody trident by now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does it matter what job each of the subjects in this issue is? If the "fight" was between four construction guys and some NFL players would the headline state that? My point is, it was off duty cops, what should that escalate the severity of a bar fight beyond, well, a bar fight? And of course, the implication is even great since once was a sergeant. Hang em all. Wait, what were four cops doing out that late, only hoodlums and hooligans prowl after midnight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and Lynch has lots of money and didn't have to sneak his own bottle into a club, or take $20 from a woman at a restaurant......

 

I don't get why people are even waiting for a police report to come out, it's not like they will believe it anyway because they will just brush whatever is in it off as cops protecting cops

 

Just like every cop is a criminal.......

all the sinners ..saints

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When he disrespected the waitress by leaving no tip I think he showed his real colors. Why the Bill's want a guy like that is beyond me. I would rather loose than win with with dead beats like that. Real men do not get into bar fights.

 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There is a difference between testimonial evidence and real evidence (physical evidence).

 

It's kind of disheartening to see you bring your typical know-it-all attitude even in situations where you are a novice. It kind of taints our previous discussions to be honest.

 

I would suggest reading up a bit on investigative/pre-interrogation justice policy before jumping in trying to explain to people that the police said McCoy did it.

 

We don't have any additional eye witness testimony because at no point did these off-duty officers find it prudent to alert the authorities and get some actual reports going. They chose (not by accident, mind you), to wait to do it. They know full well what they're doing and if you look at enough cases this becomes shockingly transparent. This is big, and exactly why I think the Philly PD are making a mockery of our justice system going after someone like McCoy through the media.

If you think I'm acting like a know-it-all here, you haven't read me enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...