Why is this actor facing 30 years while Wynn was never arrested or indicted?
Because cases are often unique. The evidence provided can differ greatly. A DA will not take a case to trial that they do not feel like they have a great chance to win. (Okay I think some do on occasion, but it is rare as no DA wants an L).
This is an explanation not an excuse. Also it is not like Danny Masterson does not have means or sway either.
Also, so what if one person is not brought to justice, does that mean that no one should be? That seems pretty dangerous.
Your statement in bold is not true. Weak cases go to trial. Strong cases are dealt with by Plea Bargain. Media pressure and social momentum force the prosecution in city or county or state court when evidence is weak. Eg. d.u.i. cases rarely go to trial.
* Who is behind the conspiracy to get him convicted?
* If there was "no evidence" - how did all the members of the jury vote to convict?
* How did the judge even let it go to jury? Wouldn't the defense team have requested a dismissal given the lack of evidence? I've watched many law and order episodes, so I believe this can happen.
* What larger plot is this whole conspiracy part of? There has to be more to it then sending some random guy no one has heard of to jail for 30 years
THANKS!
His crime was that he was an active Scientologist, and the women didn't call it rape until Lia Remini pushed them to accuse him of rape.
Because cases are often unique. The evidence provided can differ greatly. A DA will not take a case to trial that they do not feel like they have a great chance to win. (Okay I think some do on occasion, but it is rare as no DA wants an L).
This is an explanation not an excuse. Also it is not like Danny Masterson does not have means or sway either.
Also, so what if one person is not brought to justice, does that mean that no one should be? That seems pretty dangerous.
Your statement in bold is not true. Weak cases go to trial. Strong cases are dealt with by Plea Bargain. Media pressure and social momentum force the prosecution in city or county or state court when evidence is weak. Eg. d.u.i. cases rarely go to trial.
This is wrong. Plenty of slam dunk cases are never plea bargained because a trial win is excellent for a DA’s career; so they never offer one.
Because cases are often unique. The evidence provided can differ greatly. A DA will not take a case to trial that they do not feel like they have a great chance to win. (Okay I think some do on occasion, but it is rare as no DA wants an L).
This is an explanation not an excuse. Also it is not like Danny Masterson does not have means or sway either.
Also, so what if one person is not brought to justice, does that mean that no one should be? That seems pretty dangerous.
Your statement inboldis not true. Weak cases go to trial. Strong cases are dealt with by Plea Bargain. Media pressure and social momentum force the prosecution in city or county or state court when evidence is weak. Eg. d.u.i. cases rarely go to trial.
As a rule of thumb, the first guy's bolded statement is more accurate than the second guy's. Neither, of course, is absolutely true. But to say "weak cases go to trial" as a rule is not reality.
5
0
I am concerned with evidentiary standards since ...
Your statement inboldis not true. Weak cases go to trial. Strong cases are dealt with by Plea Bargain. Media pressure and social momentum force the prosecution in city or county or state court when evidence is weak. Eg. d.u.i. cases rarely go to trial.
As a rule of thumb, the first guy's bolded statement is more accurate than the second guy's. Neither, of course, is absolutely true. But to say "weak cases go to trial" as a rule is not reality.
At least I gave an example of a type of case that rarely goes to trial, dui cases. Show us something! Offer evidence or anecdotes. Give us something! Try this: About (90 to 95)% of city or county or state cases are handled by plea bargain. About 99% of federal cases are handled by plea bargain.
* Who is behind the conspiracy to get him convicted?
* If there was "no evidence" - how did all the members of the jury vote to convict?
* How did the judge even let it go to jury? Wouldn't the defense team have requested a dismissal given the lack of evidence? I've watched many law and order episodes, so I believe this can happen.
* What larger plot is this whole conspiracy part of? There has to be more to it then sending some random guy no one has heard of to jail for 30 years
THANKS!
What is the evidence? Seems an accusation made 20 years after the alleged incident
The guy seems like a POS but not one iota of evidence mentioned.
Two things can be true. He very likely is a POS who is guilty. As far as the articles I've seen there is only hearsay about events that happened 2 decades ago and were not reported to police until more than a decade after they originally happened. Not a solid legal case and given the jury deliberated for a week clearly this was not overwhelming.
Also true these are pop culture articles which likely failed to report key facts. It is entirely possible we will get some information later on that is more meaningful.
Someone more legally versed is there a way to get past the statute of limitations if you can demonstrate some witness intimidation conspiracy?
Actually one of the victims was raped in 2003 and reported it to police in 2004.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.