Wild Court Moments
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- Interesting trial.
JUDGE WASHINGTON'S CRIMINAL DOCKET
• Video
Camera
amzn.to/3fzByDF
The new microphone! (Blue Yeti)
amzn.to/3mMq6qy
streamyard.com?pal=6179087342370816
Merch law-talk-with-...
ProSe Contempt
• Video
intro
Song: Xenogenesis
Artist: TheFatRat
Artist's channel: / thisisth. .
New Jersey vs. Marrakush Society
• Sovereign Citizens In ...
Sovereign Citizens In Court #17
• Sovereign Citizens In ...
Sovereign Citizens In Court #5
• Sovereign Citizens In ...
Sovereign Citizens Traffic Stop #1
• Sovereign Citizen Traf...
Sovereign Citizens In Court Playlist
• Sovereign Citizens In ...
Sovereign Citizens In Court #1
• Sovereign Citizens In ...
Funny Old Lady In Court
• Funny Old Lady In Court
Drunk Attorney In Court
• Real Attorney Reacts T...
No Pants Court Appearance
• Real Attorney Reacts T...
This commentary remix work constitutes a fair use of any copyrighted materials under section 107 of the US copyright law.
paid links
law-talk-with-...
The new microphone! (Tonor Q9)
amzn.to/3dPei3L
www.amazon.com... Pro Se defendant makes bad opening argument and we pay a visit to Judge Middleton.
That 911 call was like listening to your child when they're rambling on about how they played their Minecraft game for 3 hours, and they don't know how to describe anything, but they also never stop talking. If you know, you know.
omg . . . PERFECT ANALOGY!!! 🤣
As someone who would have loved to be able to become an attorney, I absolutely love this channel! Congratulations on 80k Mike 🎉
The prosecutor sort of flipped back and forth between "listen to the call and see how drunk she was, nothing makes sense" and "in the call, she said she was driving, we have to believe her".
Both attorneys appeared very cordial and professional. I bet that prosecutor wins/charms a lot of jurors when in trial.
This one was so frustrating, we all know she’s guilty. However, the judge did a good job.
Thanks Mike!
I don't think she did a good job. She and the prosecutor should have been yelling "Facts not in evidence" about 1000 times. Banas was so full of crap.
@@alicelaybourne1620 she did the right thing with what she had, we needed more. No server testimony, no video from the bar or the gas station. That lady was definitely guilty, but we live in America and justice is blind
doesnt matter what you think you know. matters what you can prove. fault is 100% on the prosecution for not doing their job correctly.
Why is it frustrating if you think there's reasonable doubt?
@@Michael-pt8cr for me there’s no doubt, the case against her was not proven. That’s frustrating
She wouldn't call it a shovel as much as she would call it debris.
Poor investigation from law enforcement. How did he not go to the scene!? And no better from Prosecutor... the fact that the judge asked more questions than the other two combined says everything. Lol. Also, where was she from 2am when bar closed to 6am when the 911 call was made?
Getting eiffel towered by 2 light-skinned black men
The outcome is a bit surprising after hearing the 911 call…but then I’m not a judge 😮…glad no one was hurt…good video!!
I don't understand why tho. She admitted on the 911 call that she crashed and she was by herself. I'm only in the first few painful minutes of this recording. The Communications Operator is a Saint.
@@Claudia-lq3ns she said "she was involved in an accident" that does not mean she was driving, or guilty of causing it, it simply shows she reported an incident, which she did follow the law, it now creates a time line of events, now the State has to prove that she was behind the wheel, caused the accident, let alone was responsible for the damages. This is a CIVIL Mater under common law, in order to prove criminal intent or violations under Public Law (Statutory), the State now has to prove their side to be true. There was NO evidence prior to that she was driving, let alone driving in a reckless manner, let alone any traffic citation that shows prior related issues that would have led to causing the incident. For all we know another car or pedestrian, or animal, or shovel came out of no where and forced the incident to occur. The state had to prove her story inaccurate, and they themselve did NOT bring any witnesses forward to prove such claims.
@Mike Zitterich correct me if I'm wrong, but she said "I was trying to get off the highway" and "I hit the shovel" and "I hit the debris". Did I mishear that?
@@zitterich76 do you know people lie? Why do you so vehemently believe her?
@@zitterich76 shovel "came out of nowhere"... how now?
26:05 - the trooper actually does and can hear the 911 calls as they’re being called in to and if they’re the one actively taking the call
Why didn't the prosecuter have the glasses check for a prescription, which might have matched up to her prescription power?
Anyone here ever been ruffied? A friend and I were out one night. Had one drink and a couple guys bought us a drink. All of the sudden both of us were incoherent. We knew we had to get out of there so we faked having to use the restroom. We slipped out the back door and barely made it to the car. When my friend started to drive out they came running after us. I didn’t even remember it until my friend mentioned it.
This is a real thing. These people are predators and that needs to be considered in a case like this.
If she had access to that car she could have did anything
42:20 time marker. Hit loop.....yea I don't know either 😂😂😂
Prosecution should’ve had witnesses from the bar to say whether or not she was with two black men. Prosecutor should’ve subpoenaed the medical records to see what she was treated for. Four hours in an ER is nothing…head injury would be a lot longer. Shame on the prosecutor.
That one attorney that argued was such a prick
If. The cousin was at the bar with the “driver”, why didn’t he get in his car and follow them to her place? Where were they going and why?
Wow she was guilty as hell, listen to the 911 call. So sad
I think she blacked out after leaving the bar.
No one roofies a big one like that, need a serious amount due to the massive size.
😲 oh dear lord.....she's was beyond plastered when she called 911. Are we sure she didn't hit the fictitious black man? So she basically crashed somewhere in America. 😂
Where are these two mysterious men? Has no one tried to find them? Did they just get out of the car and abandon her in a crashed car?
CONVERSATING !!awaaaaaaa ITS NOT SMALL! ITS HIDEOUS
Her lawyer was doing a perfect job, WHY get on the stand.
A jury may have convicted
The front end pucture shows evidence of something going accross the hood and into and through the windshield. I would also think the maybe enough in the ouctures to prove the passenger seat was broken by whatever went through the windshield. If the would have been the passenger, whatever went through the windshield probably would have killed her.
She sounded like she was mixing alcohol and something else.
BOOM NOT GUILTY
This defense attorney is weird, trying to make points that are irrelevant. Must be fresh out of law school
Gotta Love the infamous “Black man “ again!
When I heard the Trooper say that, I LITERALLY rolled my eyes AND head…
Right! The mysterious black man did it excuse is alive and strong!
If a black man was driving, the seat would have been laying back, almost to back seat!!!
because EVEryBODY is afraid of the boogyman in the dARK
@@LeslyeMcCulloch😂😂😂
That 911 call had me so lost I had to pause my game to make sure I wasn't the one with brain damage.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
there is a saying as pissed as a chook ... I would say this chook is as pissed as you get and still cluck
I did the same thing lol. It made me look back and say "This isn't making sense." Got me dying in the dungeon over and over again in Diablo 4 lol.
nope its you
She was driving
"I was on 94, I hit a lot of 94". Blackout drunk, but she remembers she wasn't the driver.
..and admitted to driving on the 911 call. If the cops arrest someone for driving under the influence w/o a field sobriety test, BAC report or blood test nor witnesses who saw her driving erratically and/or crash, the state can't prove it's case so why bother to arrest her? Criminal cases are meant to be a wake up call as they are time consuming and expensive if you have the 'means' to pay for your own defense attorney v a state provided one at taxpayers expense is only gonna get you a deal from the DA$ office to plead to something as we have a 2 tier system ~ 1 for the rich and poliTICally CoNNected citizens and the poor noBODY gets the SHafT
Crazy how she remembers perfectly every detail that helps her but doesn't remember anything else the entire night.
Have you never dealt with someone drunk before? They remember certain things and other things they’d never know happened unless someone else told them. What I find unbelievable is that no one is even considering what she’s saying could absolutely be true.
Something similar happened to me (minus the car accident) when I was 22 where 4 army guys I met that night drove me to their house in my car from the bar. It was the house of the Officer and oldest of the group. He was going through a divorce and about to lose his nice house off base, so we all decided to continue the party there. I was excited to go because they said they wanted to play Rock Band with me because I played the drums. We were having a great time gaming while I sipped ONE beer (and I wasn’t super drunk beforehand or anything). The next thing I knew, I was waking up in a bedroom with 4 men taking turns on me. I left the next morning in my own car as it was parked outside the house. I walked out the front door with them laughing at me calling me a you know what when I really just wanted to play video games cuz I was obsessed with gaming and jamming out at the time (I went on to be a pro gamer for Gears of War). I was interested in one of the soldiers but had no intention of even having intercourse with that one. I thought I’d met some cool guy friends since most of my friends at the time were dudes (which is exactly why I ended up alone that night cuz my buddy left with a girl he met at the bar). At most, I was hoping for new buddies and maybe a spark between myself and the cute one I liked; and at the least, I thought it would be a fun jam session.
I wasn’t supposed to be driving that night since my friend was my DD (and I was the only one with a working car between us), so they agreed to drive me home since one of the men claimed to not be drinking and he was the one who drove my vehicle to their house. Had he gotten into an accident in my car and was drinking, do you think him and his buddies would’ve stayed waiting for the cops, putting their military careers in jeopardy? Absolutely not.
The reason I bring this up is because a young woman by herself at a bar is an easy target and with how drunk she was, the men she described could’ve easily been setting her up as a mark. When they crashed, of course he knew cops would show up so he ditched her. Granted I understand she could be lying through her teeth, all I know is that I was extremely naive and way too trusting of people when I was in my young and dumb stage. I didn’t break laws and I’ve always just been a good girl. Yes I wanted to party, but never once did I want to be the piñata for 4 soldiers twice my size. I went from being totally fine to being blackout “drunk” from sipping a beer at their house.
Things like this happen everyday and it just blows my mind that no one is even considering her testimony as the truth. In my case, it’s my word against 4 soldiers (and soldiers are held higher than gold in this country). I didn’t even try to report them because I just knew I’d be attacked for going after those “fine young men” in a military town. It just really goes to show how cynical the world is and how we look down at young people going out to have a good time. She was drunk out of her mind and couldn’t even spell her own name. I don’t know how she could’ve even figured out how to even turn her car on. Furthermore, in my hometown, people say “I was driving” or “we were driving” when they mean they were riding passenger. The whole “I, I, I” argument is easily explained by common improper vernacular and her inebriated state.
Again, I understand this is her saving her own ass whether she’s telling the truth or not, I just feel her story is still absolutely *possible.*
@@PneumaNoose your experience isn't exactly like hers, though. She claims she was blackout drunk except for things that help her. She conveniently doesn't remember the 911 call but remembers the gas station clerk and exactly what was said. She only remembers pieces that help her.
Those glasses were clearly female glasses. Not a man's glasses. I don't believe there were 2 men at all. I wish that the ADA had gone to the pub she was at and ask to see surveillance. I bet it would show her leaving by herself. She did what any racist white girl would do, blame it on black men and then insinuate that they drugged her, which would explain why she "blacked out".
With that said, something similar happened to me, that happened to you. It was one guy though. I went to his place to play Guitar Hero bc it had just come out. We didn't drink. But I went over there with zero intention for sex.
He raped me, all night long. And didn't let me go til 6am bc he had to go to work.
@@PneumaNoosedo you know the name of those 4 men? Did you know before? Wouldn’t you want to find out?
@@michaela6073 I want nothing to do with those men ever again. This was like 15 years ago and I truly didn’t even remember it until I watched this video. I had blocked it out for so long. My doctor told me once that it’s my brain protecting myself from trauma, but don’t quote me on that cuz I don’t see that doctor anymore. Anyway, I was very young and naive, my only concern was to get back to normal at that time. I have about 30 years worth of trauma I’ve yet to unpack, but I really have no desire to ever face my abusers. The thought makes my heart race and my stomach turn.
@@michaela6073 I always get nervous when people confront me and say “why didn’t you turn him/them in?” The best response I’ve ever come up with is, “it’s not my job to save the world from the people who abused me.” I know that’s not noble, but I’ve learned the hard way that I need to just worry about myself cuz no one else is worried about me.
Does anyone else watch these things and think of 1000 additional questions that SHOULD have been asked?
Did he ask her if she had been drinking before she went to the bar? If he did, I missed it.
Almost every time.
1001
I think the Trooper should have been asked why he did essentially zero investigation on this. The law is if there are two reasonable explanations- the defense gets the win. That's how it's supposed to be.
Trooper took no pics, didn't go to the bar to question the bartenders about who was there- maybe even get video? Didn't swab steering wheel or airbags for dna...
And if that passenger seat was laid back, someone was sitting there and whiplashed.
If there was a guy driving, but he hightailed it outta there, and she woke disoriented, drunk, and alone- she may have believed in her drunken state that she'd been driving when she made the 911 call.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is not beyond ALL doubt. And ppl need to remember this on a jury bc that's how innocent ppl get sent to prison.
The prosecution really hit the shovel on this one.
Debris
🤣🤣
😂
They are pretty much in midst of a bunch of a mess
I think she was trying to say shoulder of the road. not shovel
An actual legitimate use of “I wasn’t driving, I was traveling” lol
I wasn’t driving or travelling: I was tripping
The 911 call is absolutely priceless. Brought the genie out of the 🍾. She sounds like her blood alcohol was .40 . Love the 911 operator
If there are records she hit her head I beleive her
That's what makes me think she either hit her head or she was roofied. She can't even spell her name or articulate where she is and her back was only 2x the legal limit. Something happened
And even rhiugh she told in herself in that call , she was stillmallowed to win this case! This is nonsense ajd clear priviledge if I ever saw 1
@@TinkerBell-bt6vucouldn’t she just have been drunk and had a wreck? Did she have bezos on her blood test or did I miss if she took one or not?
@michaela6073 it's been a while since I watched this so I can't remember if she took a blood test or not.
She admitted to being drunk as a skunk at the very least! But she was soooo completely out of if it that I think she was roofed or had head trauma from the crash. I dont think the cops even considered that at all and just saw a "drunk girl' which doesn't surprise me considering how bad they botched their investigation to start with. They didnt even do an investigation at all which was led to such a lack of evidence and one of the reasons she was aquitted. But they should have done a lot more tests at the hospital just seeing her condition at the time
With the defense going all in on saying someone she met at the bar was driving, why didn't the prosecution go to the bar and try to get surveillance video or talk to the bar staff to see if anyone could prove or disprove her defense.
They may have. The bar doesn't have to give them video. I wondered why there wasnt intersection camera footage, but it may be a small town.
There is also a possibility they DID see footage, but the footage exonerated her.
Bar footage wouldn’t be that helpful for the prosecution. It wouldn’t show her getting into her car. So I suspect they didn’t request it. It actually could have showed her sitting at a table with 2 AA guys so actually could have corroborated her story. Prosecutors and law enforcement usually look for ways to prove guilt rather than looking for ways to prove truth.
Totally agree...and if nothing else, to see if complaints had been made by other folks....🤬
@@smasher.338 I think if there was that footage, defence would have sought it. And in any case if the prosecutor had evidence that was exculpatory they would be obliged to turn it over, or risk the whole thing being thrown out for violating due process. I don't the state would have felt the need to try and get anything like that, best case scenario it only shows her but would quite possibly leave open reaosnable doubt anyway, worst case it helps the defence.
It's prolly her 1st DUI so she's gonna get a deferred sentence anyway so why bother spending taxpayer$ hard earned $ to collect more evidence? The officer claims he only worked 1st shift at the time and his contact with the drunked driver was early in the morning as it was still dark outside .... cops customarily begin their shift @ 7am if their work 1st shift just as nurses do. If they pull a 'double' they work from 7a - 7p just as nurses do on 1st shift ... which is customary for most MANufacturing plants too that produce their end products 24/7 w/3 shifts ....
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why you get a lawyer.
Took the words right out of my mouth 😂
BEST $5,000+ she ever spent.
She got out of it. But I'm pretty sure she perjured. The prosecutor sucked.
This is how guilty people get off all the time. So what we have learned is just wander off and give some vague descriptions of someone else and off you go. Ah the justice system.
@@jeremyhaimes2613 and it's a lady.
The 911 operator said “okay that makes zero sense, I don’t know what you’re saying”
She doesn’t know what she’s saying either, sir 😂
Was thinking the entire time “prosecution has the burden”. Although improbable, it’s plausible. Wonder if prosecution figured it was “cut and dry” and too much work to get detailed forensics?Other outstanding questions for me: inward impact marks on hood and windshield looked like something hit on the outside while driving, could they investigate the sunglasses further for other dna or where they were bought, traffic or business cctv from the night or witnesses from the bar to verify she left with anyone?
I guess I'm not weird for being this way, but watching videos like these are way more interesting than any movie Hollywood ever produced. Maybe I'm with like-minded people on this stream.
Thank you
You can't make this stuff up!
AGREED!
😁Glad I’m not the only one 🤗
I feel the same.
At the end the trooper dropped the ball by not documenting everything with photos. She got away with it.
He doesn't seem super prepared or ready to answer questions too. Yup, let this be a lesson to our law enforcement community. We're routing for you guys 💙
I don't think she "got away" with anything. I think she was incredibly fortunate that she wasn't raped, that her head injury wasn't worse, and that the bad policing didn't ruin her life.
@@Claudia-lq3ns eh some of them. I’m not rooting for all of em, cuz often times they’re the ones perverting the laws for their own benefit. Had state troopers arrest my bf while sleeping in his car in a parking lot at 7am for DUI. Took $2,000 as “evidence”, case was dismissed, and when evidence was to be given back, only said he had $600, I said no that’s not right. Recounted it and said oh ur right there’s $800 here does that sound better?” Never filled out a receipt but said they counted it all in front of him, which they did not. Then told me “well he was drunk he won’t remember.” He was not drunk. I’ve heard the same experience from many ppl too. They can just arrest ppl to seize their money. Civil forfeiture is abused constantly. Working class ppl abused as a revenue source.
She incriminated herself on 911…she said she was driving and she crashed..judge is wrong.
@@johnmarcey7176 She said a lot of things on 911 that were also complete nonsense. She clearly didn't know what had happened.
My father worked for UDOT here in Utah for 43 years in the 70s 80s 90s in 2000s and investigated fatalities and accidents from the point of the mountain down to Nephi and he really saw some doozies. He died last year but I wonder what he would’ve thought of this trial, he was always taking photographs and back then he had to use the old big black suitcase of the Polaroid camera and then he had these little things in black tubes and you’d have to run them across the photograph after it came out in order to preserve it and seal it it was pretty wild…I miss him so much may he rest in peace❤❤❤❤❤❤
Nice salute to the trooper's service. I sure appreciate these honorable, patient officers.
He was very professional. But I hope he learns from this case to better document his incidents. Bodycam would have been great here. And his interpretation of the intoxication of the suspect was also lacking.
@@vjcodec His manner was professional, his investigation not so much, it was his failure to properly do his job that got her off the hook.
user xd5js4wb4d....I completely agree with you!❤ I do not know how these officers keep so calm! I would probably not even last a hour Lol ,They get so disrespected some of the things people say to them is so AWFUL..It's really unbelievable. I appreciate them also and believe they should be paid so much more.❤
This case is really infuriating. I’m glad it had some comedic relief haha
I am confused about why the picture and comments about the glasses were even allowed in though.. She took that picture later on, in her own.. Also, it seems like the prosecution took for granted that the case was in the bag.
In her own what?
@@prayas1673 i think that was suppose to be "on" her own
@@MrsBees It was, thank you 😅
Pretty much any Defense exhibits are allowed, it is up to the Prosecution to question them.
It is up to the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt her guilt in the case. I think that the prosecutor did believe it was a slam dunk and just seemed to run through the trial...slow the heck down. He was practically running over the tropper as he was talking while testifying,
The judge covering her mouth to hide her giggles during the 911 call was everything.😂🎉
Who's betting those are her regular glasses and the ones she's wearing are her spares? 😂
I cannot believe the outcome of this trial; it makes me so angry at the system. The system fails us time and time again. The fact that the defendant was able to blame something she clearly did on a couple of black guys and create so much doubt that she gets off is beyond me. 🤷♀She clearly stated on the 911 call that she was driving, and she hit a shovel. It makes me sick because instead of charging her and giving her a DUI like she deserved, she gets to go drunk driving again. She was so drunk she doesn't even remember her 911 call. Who knows maybe next time she'll kill someone and then they'll charge her for vehicular manslaughter. It's disgusting how people are losing their lives to drunk drivers and we find out that the driver should have been taken off the streets long before they killed someone. 😡
It’s about the state not proving it’s case and the cop making an arrest w/out sufficient evidence which is probably why he’s no longer state trooper
They should’ve pulled a video from the bar she left. Everything is on cc cameras. In this day and age where cops cannot be trusted this wasn’t enough evidence
Not to mention the office, or not taking pictures of where the seat was
I agree.. all these people commenting seem to have missed or ignored the defendant’s own words..
@vpierce3842 There was more than enough evidence to make an arrest. Just because she wasn't convicted, doesn't mean the trooper did anything wrong. He had an extreme amount of probable cause. If he didn't, this wouldn't have even gone to trial
The broken seat back sticks in my mind because I've seen it before, even experienced it once myself. It jerks into that position when a vehicle slams into another car or solid object. The weight of a human body's forward momentum is abruptly reversed, still traveling at some speed. The position of the passenger seat is often seen after head-on collisions, and in cases of driver suicide resulting from driving into a tree or the solid structure of an underpass on interstates. If I recall correctly, in front-end accident crash studies that test auto equipment, including seatbelts, as well as seat integrity, BMW is the only auto manufacturer in which the seats do not fail. So I'm just offering this tidbit of info for whatever it's worth.
Mild concusion is common even in low speed crashes, although the medical evidence has been confirmed only in recent years. That would of course compound confusion associated with drunkenness. Therefore, I would hesitate to laugh about how Christina spoke on the 911 call. A brief mini mental status test (8-10 questions) is a good early indication of cognitive impairment not from
alcohol.
All that said, I think she might indeed have been the driver, but I also agree with the judge that the evidence falls short of a guilty verdict, not even considering my remarks above.
I'd sure like to know if there were footprints or other evidence of the man she said was driving and his cousin!
My car seat reclines that far back, what make you presume it is broken?
@@alicelaybourne1620 it’s not normal to drive with a seat in that position tho
@@Travisrogers87 it is if you're a cool gangstaaaa
I don't think the seat was broken. It looks like how my seat looks when someone is tired and naps in the front seat.
To your footprint comment... completely agree. It would be nice to know. But the lazy cop didn't even go to the scene, so no one will ever know.
How do you conclude that the passenger seat is broken and evidence that someone was sitting in it at the time of the crash (I fully agree), but then conclude that she was driving?? Kinda hard to be sitting in two seats at the same time.
The rare “random bad man roofied my drink crashed my car and abandoned me!” Defence to DUI as seen in the wild!
A common phrase when I was a small child "a big boy done it and then ran away" Different words but same basic premise......... which is, please don't blame me for the broken window, trodden flowerbed or whatever
Oh he’s a detective now! I hope his skills for documenting crime scenes are better!
He sure had tunnel vision on this case. He thought everything was so obvious he didn't button up all the angles. Sloppy.
Did he have body cam on 🤔
The officer is very professional and extremely intelligent. Good job with his testimony.
This is the DUI equivalent of "those aren't my pants"
14:06 "she was under the influence of something. Alcohol. Or liquor"
🤦🏽♀️😂😂😂
NO WAY her head went anywhere near that windshield. 15 years ago, my best friend was the passenger in a vehicle hit by a drunk driver. Every bone in her face was broken (including her eye sockets). She was airlifted to Shock Trauma (one of the best trauma hospitals in the world), and she BARELY survived, after multiple reconstructive face surgeries. I went to see her car the day after, and there was a face mark impression in the windshield, but the (tempered) windshield glass was not broken through. No way this chick hit that windshield and caused that hole. That was a metal sign post (or something similar...like a SHOVEL).
I was a passenger in a car that got into an accident. My head hit the windshield and I got knocked out completely. By the time I woke up the police and ambulance was already there. I got out of the car and started walking home when the ambulance lady ran up and stopped me. I didn’t even know where I was or what had happened. I didn’t remember anything for like 15 mins before the crash. I had just left my house and apparently I thought oh I should go back home. The windshield was cracked but no hole.
I was in an accident and my head broke the windsheild. Other than some cuts, and finding little bits of glass in my hair for a day or two, i was f....uhhh....wait what was i saying...
Wrong. I hit a tree doing 45 mph, flipped my minivan and WITH a seatbelt on, smashed my head into the telephone pole and didn’t have one broken/ fractured bone in my head! I did however have a deep wound in my head that required 22 staples. There are many different variables that have an effect on the outcome of the injury.
... is that when they 1st came out with cars made of plastic?
Yep
How does the phone call not sway the judge right there? She proclaimed SHE hit something like 10 times. She didn’t mention anyone else. That’s a rough verdict.
A defendant can not be convicted on a confession alone. That's the corpus delicti rule. There has to be sufficient evidence that the crime actually occurred.
If she was completely sloshed AND was reclining in the passenger seat then thrown into the windshield, her bell would have been rung big time which could have caused her to talk crazy🤷♂️
There’s no hard evidence basically. The reasonable doubt comes in that she was just drunk and talking incoherently or hit her head. They didn’t prove anything. She may be swayed. But they didn’t prove it. Her being drunk isn’t up for debate. It’s whether she was the one driving. And she may have said she drove. But she was also talking about a shovel and couldn’t spell her name.
It boils down to their is a chance she wasn't driving. So if it's not proven without a shadow of a doubt, they can't find them guilty. Also, she didn't confess. The 911 call also stated that she didn't hit anything and she didn't crash. But she sure was quick to say there's nobody else here. Nope. Nobody. But you can hear a man talking in the background. Just my opinion.
@@pennkeukathere was plenty. Her admission that she tried to move it after the accident. Even absent that, the seat was at her height. She was perfectly capable of answering all questions but who was actually driving.
The fact she walked to the gas station is miraculous. "Your honor I was not consuming alcohol I was drinking it."
more like the alcohol consumed her.
We honestly don’t know for sure that she walked to the gas station. Someone could have picked her up then dropped her off.
The 911 operator needs a raise in pay.
She said it was two o’clock at night and she didn’t feel well… is she implying they roofied her? The accident wasn’t called in until 8am… that’s six hours time difference???
See my post. I speculated the same, hence the “I didn’t feel right” and the guy disappearing into his cousins car, not wanting to be identified with her being drugged. The 6 hour time difference could have been because they took her to their place or a hotel?? Then we’re returning her home.
Her reaction when that was mentioned tells me she may have a recollection of something else happening to her before the crash in that period of lost time
She’s absolutely implying that she was roofied and it’s certainly plausible.
@@DianaBamaRNYeah they like the biguns
This case is eerily similar to a case in Georgia where a young lady’s date called the cops on her because he claims she started freaking out suddenly. The cop that showed up and arrested the lady was a prosecution witness and as he was describing her behavior it was clear he was describing a drugging situation. The defense ripped into the cop and made him look like a complete doofus. The police never investigated the woman’s behavior and took her dates word as fact. The cop never requested the dates name or info, date was in the wind. Judge ended up tossing the case.
Ohh man that’s crazy. Is this case online !?
@@cgwalker7722 it was on this channel somewhere..
This case reminded me of that also
Which is why I said if the 2 guys were true, the lady was very lucky and could have ended raped or worse. She was talking and acting like someone date drugged.
I agree. It happened to a friend of mine. Stopped to grab a drink at a bar. Called her husband to say she would be home in a few minutes. Started feeling very woozy and remembered a man flirting with her in the bar. The next thing she remembered, it was 6 hours later and she woke in her car which was pulled over. She walked over to a parked police car to ask for help. And they arrested her for DUI. She believes she was raped then dumped with her car. The cops wouldn’t take her to a hospital.
This was years ago so she didn’t have a cell phone.
Charges were dropped. I assume that was because her BAC was low.
They are getting a little better about doing a full drug screen on intoxicated people.
How pleasant everyone’s life would be without the intrusion of alcohol. Poor police officers, dealing with the drunk and disorderly.
Im surprised her defense wasnt "I was too drunk to walk so I had to drive."
Wow......super clever comment.
It was nice to see a whole trial from start to finish like this. I know it's very time consuming, but it'd be nice to get more like this.
Thank you
@@LawTalkWithMike I watch your and other of your videos all the time. But this is one time that I have to step in. Have you ever been drugged , when you just wanted to got to a bar and just have time to relax? Have you trusted someone with your life and ended up waking up in a strange place not knowing what happened to you during the blackout? WELL this is really scary to ( Men and Women) that experience this. And the really sad part is they can be lucky that they wake up. Stop and think of something. If he HAD NOT wrecked she could be DEAD. There is a lot of what if's. That I alone can think of, but for people to make fun of someone possibly being kidnapped and etc... Have you Experienced It. It is Not Funny.
Wendy
Bless you. I really pray for you and your family to Never experiences anything negative. BB Take Care
@wendynabors7395 Calm yourself... yes, she is lucky that she didn't die because she allowed two random strangers to take her home, she is also lucky to have not gotten a DUI because she was by herself and none of that happened. No one even alluded to her being kidnapped. You are projecting your fears onto this case. Let's say you believe every word she said. The worst you could accurately say is that she allowed two strangers to take her home. Anything beyond that is pure speculation and you are just making stuff up to make it seem more dangerous. Sure, she could have been roofied, kidnapped, and murdered... she also could have been swept off her feet by a multimillionaire and flown to Italy to live out her days in luxury. Both are equally plausible. Then to end your comment with some passive aggressive nonsense like, "I pray your family never experiences anything negative..." because he didn't believe her? Get a life. I don't speak for Mike, but if I did, I would say please unsubscribe, he doesn't need "fans" like you.
@@wendynabors7395this is a court case. We watch/listen and base our opinions on the facts presented, not our feelings of all the “what if’s”. Conclusions based on feelings is not how our justice system works.
It's actually very easy. ALL of these courts live stream almost everyday. It's not hard. You can even watch the full docket almost daily. Where do you think Mike gets these vids? All he does is stick his face in the corner of a court stream.
She was that honest part of drunk that comes out sometimes. Her brain couldn't figure out how to maintain a lie
"It is better that ten guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer" - Blackstone's Ratio.
That's sometimes hard to swallow, but it's still a fundamental principle of justice.
Yeah it sucks
“For whom?” (: but yes I agree.
Not in this this case doesn’t apply
Why is it 10 ? Not 20 or 5?
Yes
Congratulations on 80k Mike. It’s amazing how your channel has grown from your snowy red jacket to your LTWM zipper shirts lol! You even started your own clothing fad! Complete with fez and ascot! Seriously sometimes I do learn something and I am always entertained. Thank you for bringing us such interesting, humorous, and sometimes serious content. You help us to laugh at ourselves and definitely help us get through the stresses of our daily lives! Here’s to 100k and your first TH-cam subscriber award plaque! It’s definitely on the horizon! ❤❤
Thank You 😘
She'll get caught the next time
Without the Officer actually witnessing the person operating the vehicle it is really hard to PROVE whomever was driving.
Well the prosecutor and investigators did such a bad job that her defense of 'well she says she didn't do it' was enough for a non guilty verdict. Like you have to almost try to do this bad of a job
@@hammerlane3871
Exactly. No one except the tow driver saw the vehicle at the scene. No pictures taken.
You mean except for the defendant stating it was her driving 10 times...
She says it was her driving. Do they think she's lying?
@@mrsangelafisher
The only time she said she was driving was on the 911 call where she was mumbling all kinds of gibberish. The judge threw that 911 call out because there was no way to tell which parts of what she said was true.
It's so convolutely insane! We know each other a long time, I comment as I go along. I don't believe a word she's saying about another driver, she's guilty as hell, needs to pay the price and get some help.
She admitted that she was driving on the 911 call!
Or any other time for that matter
that's why her attorney was going for insufficient evidence ... but no video from the bar or freeway* intersection recordings. or how many calls were placed for that "crash", the 911 operator was hearing about a crash at that location for a while by the time she called in.
There was reasonable doubt. Interviewing the bartender would have helped (did she leave with someone), better police investigation (photos of the interior; fingerprints/DNA from the steering wheel). I think she was guilty, too, but understand why the judge found her NG.
He is a great officer. Thank you for sharing great judge. Keep save and healthy.
Congrats Mike on 80k subs! I'm glad to say I've been along for the ride. It's been great fun and I know the road to 1 million will be even better! Love you Mike! 💋😚
Im taking full credit for that achievement. 😆
Coming from a drunk: "debris and shovel" meant gravel. Her saying she wasn't in a crash meant she was thinking that 911 was asking her if she crashed with another car. The timeline doesn't make a lot of sense but when you're drunk, you can still fall asleep after an accident. She probably passed out again and if there was a drunk driver, he would have had lots of time to leave.
I agree with the judge's decision. It's frustrating but I think there's definitely a reasonable doubt. You really need to have some kind of witness or video of her in the driver's seat.
I'm glad she didn't hurt anyone. I get so angry with these DUI people for personal reasons. It's good to enjoy this video knowing she's the only victim of her own stupidity.
my wife and best friend were killed by a drunk drivers so this video infuriates me
Hear here... and as a retired registered nurse my heart goes out to you sir, losing your wife and best friend due to drunken driving- the waste, the heartbreak, the needlessness, the loss... I'm so sorry. So very sorry.🙏🏻🕊🪶🌹❤️🩹💐🌏
I have no sympathy for Drunk Driving, I never have. Everyone over the age of 5 knows when you drink and drive you can KILL someone BUT people do it over, over, over.
My daughter, her boyfriend and another mother in a 2 vehicle were killed almost 5 years ago by a DD. He won't even serve the 10 years for each felony death (3), he's predicated he'll be getting out next year at christmas time or so, unless he's paroled in few months. It's disguising.
@@hack_g Very sorry Greg. Sending you love,hugs and healing.
@@hack_g Why? There is zero proof she was driving. There is WAY more proof that she was not. I understand you have good reason to want to hold people responsible......but you should be even more focused on making sure only guilty people are prosecuted.
I'm in a similar situation and my journey through this has led me to be as invested in making sure only people proven to be guilty are punished as I am that the guilty be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. There's no justice in locking up an innocent person.
Omg, the 911 call is worth the wait, I am laughing my shovel off!
It was the jewel in the crown.
I believe her totally, I would think the officer would remember the damage to the windshield.
It's interesting her BAC was still that high after not having drank (allegedly) for 4 hours (assuming 2am to 6am) not to mention however much time it took to get her to the hospital...
Yes. She got to the hospital at 8. But we don’t know when the crash happened. Is it possible that some guy took her back to his place for sex before the crash occurred?
BAC decreases at 0.015% per hour approximately so she was either 0.26 when she left the bar or went somewhere for more drinks after the bar closed.
Lots of possibilities. It’s possible she was roofied. It’s possible she went home from the bar with a guy but didn’t want to identify him. And it’s possible she was driving.
I was sure she was lying. However, there was a moment when she was getting upset, and that reaction actually made me give her story a tiny bit of credence, coupled with the time issues, the seats, the windshield and the disjointed 911 call, then at the end of the day the prosecutor relied too much on his confidence that it would be as obvious to the judge as it was to him that she was lying.
I'm sorry but I am disgusted with the ruling. It just angers me that it was so blatantly clear that she was the one who drove the car drunk and crashed and yet not only is she getting away with it, but then putting on the crying act at the end and saying "thank you your honor." just irritated the hell out of me. I could never be a lawyer, for so many reasons, but especially because of situations like this. It just anger me to no end. I would have so much trouble just letting it go and moving on with my day.
Angry, why? can you prove there wasn't a random black man there? Didn't think so. Murica! 🦅🦅
Let's look at a hypothetical situation with you as the defendant. Let's say you went to a bar to play pool and have a couple cold beers. Some unknown woman starts talking to you. After a couple beers you become "fuzzy" or feel rather buzzed and unknown woman offers to drive you home and wrecks your car in the process. She flees. You then stumble looking for help, fuzzy and confused. Would you be more angry than you are about her verdict if you were convicted on a 911 phone call? Hell yes you would be. You got someone to drive you and the only proof you have is your word.
Me too... they drive a 5000 pound weapon when drunk and get away with it. Beyond pissed. 🫤
Unless you're the defense lawyer in these cases ~ cha ching 🤑🥳. it's the difference between hiring your own attorney or having the prosecuting state provide you with one because you can't afford an aggressive defense as a conflict of 'interest' is only if the GUBBERment say$ say it is .....😩
Mike, you got me as a subscriber and I definitely enjoy your videos. There are well done. Well edited. And well commentated. I really do appreciate it and I am sure the thousands of people who view them also agree. You are one of the few reasons I am on TH-cam so much. I believe I'm going to start binging your channel. Of course I put a like on every one of them and I'm going to start commenting even more, just to help more people view your channel.
Mike congrats to 80k! You know, this case was an example of exceptionally poor investigation by the prosecution and law enforcement. I agree she was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but the prosecution relied on the 911 call to prove the case. A few missteps to point out here:
•There were no photos from the accident scene, so the position of the passenger seat and object in the car could not be confirmed
•The prosecution did not consult the defendant's insurer to see if the defendant had claimed, and if their appraiser took photos
•The damage included a large hole on the passenger side of the windshield. I would anticipate substantial injury to a passenger seated there. Why didn't the prosecution examine photos of the passenger seat? If the backrest of the seat had damage, that would be evidence no one was seated there
•No photos of the object that penetrated the windshield
•No security camera footage from the interchange cameras
•The pub the defendant attended wasn't questioned about who she was with, or if she left anyone
•The car's computer data wasn't pulled. Perhaps it could have recorded a passenger seated, or other data like doors opening.
•The car wasn't fingerprinted for unknown prints on the steering wheel that weren't the officer's or towers.
I'm not saying they should have done ALL of these items, or that all of these items would turn up useful info, but this was crucially missing, and at least may have proven guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Excellent points. There’s detectors not only for a seatbelt but also weight in the seat that would prove a passenger or not.
I agree with this all and thought the same exact things. I was surprised the defense didn't ask about why the car wasn't fingerprinted to point out more doubt.
The cop failed, plain and simple. He was lazy and they couldn't convict because of it.
Fantastic points.
I can see the points about the photos because that is basic stuff but it's not realistic to expect fingerprints and car data to be pulled on a small DUI case like this. The courts in each state are slow enough and expecting DNA evidence in minor cases like this would be a disaster.
Shipwreck! ❤
Summary: It was the prosecutor's case to lose.
The police were negligent in not taking detailed (or any!) photos at the scene, but the prosecutor could have subpoenaed:
a) surveillance footage of inside the bar and the parking lot;
b) the medical hospital report.
The defence introduced enough doubt that the prosecutor simply did not overcome.
Yes the windshield hole was most probably "debris", a tree branch, etc, and could have been shown to be such IF it was and if the trooper took photos. But failing that, it really does look like a head and so that gives reasonable doubt.
The other thing that gave me pause was the prosecutor objected to the defendant commenting on the hospital results. Yes it was hearsay but if it supported the prosecutor he would have not objected. I seemed that the prosecutor KNEW the hospital results and KNEW it would hurt his case.
I don't know about USA but the defence quoted case law that even if the defendant DID sit in the drivers seat AFTER the fact in a non-drivable vehicle then that can NOT be classed as drink-driving and the prosecutor did not object to that.
The Judge asked so so so many questions TRYING to help the prosecutor, she really believed the defendant WAS drink driving but between them given the lack of evidence they just could not prove it beyond those points of doubt that the prosecutor failed to present evidence for.
Because I can not see any reason why the prosecutor did not present surveillance footage or the hospital report, but surely they must have obtained it and viewed it, then in the end, despite believing the glasses were a total fabrication, if I was a jury member, I don't believe her but there is enough doubt not to put her away.
Lol in summary? The video was over by the time I read all that haha jk 😜 but yeah thanks for that, can't do 2 hours, especially for a frustratingly bad and what from what you wrote was an avoidable ending
@@danielbyrne5402 yeah I started a summary and got verbose sorry!
I should say disclaimer to the ending but no, I thought before hearing the ruling and thinking back on it all in retrospect, I thought it was going to be an "obvious" drunk driving ruling. That's why I'm not a judge. If I was in jury it would have taken lots of deliberations before I understood that and I might not have without the judge's explanation and TH-cam to rewind and check bits. In a jury trial she might have been found guilty!
@@jonmobrien I was thanking you, no apology needed lol, I can't watch anything that long anyway, but Mike doesn't always say whether its all one case or not, but even so, I can't start the day with a frustrating outcome due to loopholes, its...well, frustrating. As for what u said about usa laws, I know in England, if you're behind the wheel of a motor vehicle while drunk, you need a reason whether it works or not. It's called being in charge of a vehicle while intoxicated, I know this cuz I got ordered to leave my shared accommodation by police one night cuz my flatmate was a violent druggie and I had to sleep in my car. I police officer saw me 2 hours later asleep in my mothers car on my old house driveway, I would have been arrested but he radiod in and checked with the police and they confirmed I was told to do that cuz I had nowhere else to sleep.
I agree
The officer's constant "I do not recall" was very frustrating and lead to my thought of incompetance.
Trooper Reaume is doing a fine job here.
Aquaintnance 😂
If she was getting a ride home… I can’t imagine she was able to give directions or remember her address in order for a complete stranger to drive her home 😂
Most incompetent judge ever... and I do understand what truly constitutes REASONABLE doubt.
Judge handled this case as if the legal threshold was "without ANY doubt".
Also very 'telling' of the defendant's 'selective' memory. This judge is the reason for repeat DUI offenders.
Oh how privileged we are to read a comment from the supposed arbiter of what’s “reasonable”. You give yourself too much credit here. The ADA’s case rested entirely on the 911 call. Every bit of evidence beyond that was circumstantial at best. They have zero direct physical evidence that she was driving. Was she lying? Probably yes, it’s very likely. But there is REASON to believe she might not be. That is what a REASONABLE doubt is. The operative term is reason. The position of the passenger seat IS a valid and compelling reason to doubt she was driving. If no one else was in the car why was it leaned all the way back. Whose head hit the passenger side of the windshield? She was treated for a head injury, the driver side of the windshield is fine. The glasses are irrelevant and immaterial. She was drunk, possibly drugged, and certainly had a head injury when she spoke to the 911 operator. Nothing she said there could be trusted as she didn’t even know what she was saying, it can’t be used as a confession. It’s the prosecutor’s job to prove that no one could have been driving that car other than her. He failed to prove that. Since the call was the only evidence they had on her it’s REASONABLE to rule exactly as the judge did.
Affirmation action judge
@@mr.nilraps You're wrong on so many counts that I don't know where to begin. I can easily tell that your experience level with DUI cases, as well as court and evidentiary processes is at an all time low with you. You are WAY off track with your definition and analogy of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. You're not even close.
This case also does not rest 'entirely' on the 911 call. It's laughable that you put one iota of validity into the position of the passenger seat, as that pic was taken much later at the wrecker yard by the DEFENDANT herself, who knew her (laughable) 'alibi story' and easily could have flipped the lever and tilted the seat back, as there was no officer or anyone on the prosecution side there to attest to the legitimacy of that seat's position. Please don't buy a used car, if you're THAT gullible.
She was NOT treated for a head injury. NO medical documents stated that. Plus, it's obvious that you have zero hands-on experience in auto crashes, be it single car or multiples involved, as I've personally handled many wrecks where there was a single (unbelted) driver, no passengers, and the passenger side of the windshield exhibited identical damage. It's all about the angle of impact, which you're not experienced enough to even realize.
She did not "certainly have a head injury" on the 911 call. You are not a doctor and you did not examine her at that point in time. I've handled countless 'extreme drunks' who were in no crash at all and yet exhibited the same 'brain-dead' level of intoxication.
You're one that confuses 'absolutely without any doubt' with the actual legal standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Even Mike agrees with me and says that he would have found her guilty, as well as the vast majority of the commenters agree with that. That is what demonstrates the legal threshold of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. In a nutshell it's the consensus of REASONABLE judgements from a majority group of REASONABLE people.
Add/edit: Note 2 key points. The windshield shows distinct evidence that the damage was from an object OUTSIDE striking the passenger side of the windshield and NOT damage from anyone inside, or a person's head. The other key point is the trooper testified that she told him she tried to start the vehicle at the crash site. That alone is admission of DUI, as yuou do not have to be physically driving to be guilty of DUI. You only need the means (keys), ability, and intent (as admitted) to operate the vehicle even the slightest bit.
Can we appreciate the defense's decision to go with a judge only trial? I'd wager if this was a jury trial she'd have been found guilty...
I’d like to have seen the outcome had this been a jury trial. She says she remembers leaving, remembers small conversations about driving home with “strangers” cousin following, remembers waking up from crash and going to driver side to turn on likes, remembers asking gas attendant to cal 911, but doesn’t remember even one second of speaking with dispatcher? I think that coupled with her using “I” several times and not once even slightly suggesting there was another party, while explaining the crash to 911, not one person in the jury would buy her story. But still, I think it would have to come down to what her lawyer argued, and the jury wouldn’t be able to find her guilty.
Thats because the average person doesn't really go by "beyong a reasonable doubt". Most jurors think a persons guilty before they even hear testimony, they just think the persons obviously guilty because the cops arrested them. And even though there was no proof she was driving, because there isnt viedo proof of someone else driving, they assume it was her.
"My client was absolutely candid about everything she remembered." OK, but she remembered pretty much nothing after she drank too much at the bar.
Or was drugged
Oh she rememebered...the stuff that helped her case and she conveniently forgot what hurt her.
I actually have a lot of respect for the judge, it’s harder to look past your instincts and uphold your duty as a judge to enforce the law, she knew the woman had driven drunk, but it wasn’t proven within the terms required by our legal system.
Left the bar at 2am but called 911 at 6am? What happened to the 4 hours.
She was blacked out was the testimony I believe.. maybe she took a nap on the median strip? 🤭😂🤣
Ooh, ooh, maybe she walked her "attacker's" home, and finished the party, before going back to ring 911. 🤭🤭🤪
Yeah, so many questions. Also, why did it take the officer so long to get from the scene of the accident to the gas station? From what understood an hour could have passed. Like what is the distance between the two? It sounds like there were others who reported the incident. I’m curious to know what time frame those calls took place as well. What a scary and bizarre case.
That’s what I was thinking, bar closes at 2 and this happened around 6 or 7. I live in this area and know where the bar Powells is.
She was likely being assaulted by whoever drugged her at the bar- scary
I don’t know what happened either. Good question.
But according to the 911 center many people called around the time that she did so I believe the accident had just happened at 6.
Doesn't matter what you think happened or how you feel about it....all that matters is what you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, this judge was spot on, I think she made the right call.
Me too, after all! Some slip through and some are found guilty unfairly. Nothing is perfect but this judge followed the LAW respectfully and that is what her JOB IS!
Mike I did not believe her either but I really cannot believe that the officer took no photos of the crash. To me that would be a really basic thing to do and he did nothing to document the crash itself. If he had, this case may have turned out quite differently.
No one was harmed and he had no reason to collect evidence from the car. No one would have cared if they hadn't faked the Elton John fake glasses. Also, if she was roofied, he was not wearing those glasses, if you get my meaning. Both unsubstantiated claims.
I agree 100%! I thought police took pics of vehicles for ALL crash reports!!!!
I know this old, but the fact she got away with this is absolutely wild. Shame this wasn’t a jury trial because I’d be willing to bet she would’ve been found guilty.
She admitted to driving in her call. She is clearly playing the court with a game of selective memory that goes to her favor. She was guilty. Claims a ‘black man’ was responsible (typical). Finds these random ass glasses and claims they belong to the driver. Laughable. They were probably sitting in a drawer in her garage for years and she thought it would be good ‘evidence’ to throw out there and help prove her innocence.
This whole thing was shameful and laughable, simply because no innocent people were harmed. I know this is a contradiction in a way, but I feel like the court, at times, gets a bit too caught up in the exact letter of the law and throws away all common sense and reasoning. They disregard rational thinking to come to a decision and instead start quoting random and obscure rulings and statutes that let people like this woman off the hook for blatant criminal behavior. Then they’ll go and throw the books at something way less serious. It’s just a mess.
Really interesting seeing the whole trial. I have to disagree w/ your eval early on that both attorneys were doing a good job; the prosecutor really hurt his case, IMO, by asking far too many questions that were answered w/ "I don't recall". Either he did a poor job prepping his witness or was overly confident & thought would be cake walk solely relying on showing def was drunk & never coming close to proving she was driver. Also, one would expect a Trooper might at least review his notes/report/etc. in prep of being called to testify & he came off as not really giving a shite about the whole thing.
Bottom line is that the def atty did an excellent job casting doubt that client was driving while prosecutor didn't come close to showing that she was. As hard as it is to accept the verdict when our 'gut feeling', mostly spurred by the emotional 911, might be that she's guilty; that's all it is, a 'gut feeling' & that is at a minimum reasonable doubt.
The hole in the windshield was from the shovel impact!
My guess is she ran over a sign post and the sign hit the windshield. That hole is clear at the bottom of the glass. Dashboards raise up to help prevent ejection , and I do not believe a head could hit that far down because of the dash.
I sat on a DUI case before, and we were instructed that it must be proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the defendant was the driver. We had no eye witness just like this case. It sucks to let someone go when you know they are guilty as hell. That was 45 years ago, and I still get pissy when I think about it. We didn't find him innocent, but ended up a hung jury.
@@ronfullerton3162 I agree and just made another comment saying about the same thing.
Really the police on scene is at fault for not taking photos of the scene.
In Australia even the tow truck driver photographs the scene before towing, let alone the police and the vehicle owner!!!
In Australia that police would probably lose his job for failing a basic I believe-requirement.
Photos would have shown if there was a signpost or thick tree branch or something, and glasses, and dispelled much of the doubt.
When I crashed my vehicle I took photos of every angle inside and out myself, as did the tow-truck driver.
Lack of photos made the prosecutor's case so much harder to prove.
But if it was NOT her head, prosecutor should have shown there was no head injuries, glass cuts, glass embedded in her head on any hospital report.
ALSO, when the defendant said that her photo showed glass inside the vehicle, I think referring to the back seat, he attorney quickly changed the topic.
If the windshield was blown OUT from her head, there would be no glass inside the vehicle!!!
Glass would only be in the back seat if there was a big impact from the outside striking the windscreen. Like a sign. Or like in the movie Twister: "debris".
@@jonmobrien Sometimes frustrating watching this stuff and seeing them stray around like they are lost. Keep thinking there will be a big ah ha moment, but it never comes. The prosecutor has to make a 100% case, but didn't get help from crucial sources. Just another drunk turned loose on the public, and we have to hope we are not around her next time.
About the shovel, what I thought she was trying to say in her drunken stupor was she hit the shoulder.
@@jonmobrien de BRIS! Love that movie
This is a fair and honorable judge. The defendant obviously acted foolishly, but we were given limited evidence that failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
In the 911 call the defendant said herself “I hit” and never mentioned anyone with her. Wouldn’t that be proof?
Week except for the 911 call, the whole seat being close to the steering wheel and the fact that she couldn't describe the guy she agreed to go home with..... it's pretty obvious she's full of shit
@@sashac5359False confessions are more common than people think. Because of that, there is a principle in law that a confession alone isn't enough to convict
@@hammerlane3871nobody bright it back up but the trooper said she had told him that she got into the driver seat too try and drive her car out. That would have been a good point for her defense attorney to use when arguing the seat being so close.
This is a win. A fucking judge who actually does her job. Innocent until proven guilty.
Nobody "roofied" her. If they would have, they would have put her it their car. This just screams LIES from her. All made up after the fact to cover her crimes.
She got really lucky, first by surviving her accident and second by escaping justice.
Escaping justice isn’t always lucky. She needs alcohol counselling, and she won’t get any help.
First that the accident prevented her rape. Second, that her head injury wasn't worse. Third, that the incompetence of the police officer didn't impact her head injury recovery.
She got very lucky she didn’t kill it Main anyone too
Bc I don’t think she would have gotten past that so easily
The Government failed to prove its case, an acquittal is required in this case.
I love that her attorney tried to defend her alcoholism with her taking the AA 12 steps. Someone who was an occasional drinker who was smart enough not to drive home wouldn't need the 12 steps.
What?!
Her story actually makes sense: She leaves from the pub with the male, who is being followed by his cousin. They're all drunk, so he doesn't care to figure out how to move her seat in the dark,of a vehicle hes not familiar with. Plus, even 5'10" people can have very short legs and long torsos (ask me how I know. People are blown away how close my seat is to the steering wheel for a guy who is a little above average height). Also, short women think all men are tall, and she's also wasted while trying to recall the height of a man she doesn't know.
He gets into an accident and the cousin witnesses it. She's passed out during the drive in the passengers seat which is in the downward position, which puts her body in a position that could hit the lower part of the windshield, which was visibly broken from the inside of the vehicle. Not to mention that she's 5'1", which also corresponds with the location of the broken glass. He bales on the accident because he has a ride and can get away Scott-free, avoiding a dui himself and possibly other trouble he may have been in. She wakes up quite a while afterwards and is still wasted enough to only remember what happened before she fell asleep in the car on the way home.
Her story is more plausible than most in the chat were giving her credit for.
So many things here concern me.
Here in Australia, her failure to identify the driver is in itself a crime.
She admitted in the 911 call that she was the driver.
The police officer documented the seat position, but the judge states that his documentation is not sufficient. If she was able to see a photograph she would accept it.
The judge ends with saying :Don’t get behind the wheel of a vehicle any more”. “Any more”, meaning you did it in this case.
If she just met the guy that night, then her inability to identify him isn't a crime. She may not have known his identity. It's gross to me, but these one night stands happen all the time.
She admits to it in the call but then failed to know how to even spell her own name when asked, changed her mind about hitting a shovel, then debris, then not debris etc. She is so sloshed she doesn't know who she is or where she is or what is going on so it can't be taken as fact.
I actually agree with this ruling. It was very shoddy police work and evidence gathering by police. I actually beleive this girl was roofied and the guy crashed and she woke up and had no idea what was going on. The only evidence she was driving was the 911 call but she can't tell you how to spell her name in that call so that can't be taken
If the cousin was following from the bar then why were they headed to get the cousin the follow them to her house. Prosecutor missed his Perry Mason moment
Actually, she implied she was roofied. That’s consistent with being taken somewhere for sex.
@@GoodnightJLHyou completely missed my point. If the cousin is with them at the bar there’s no reason to go to his house to get him to follow them to her house if the cousin is there already. I don’t remember exactly because it was 7 months ago
@@luckyhecks5904
I’m assuming that she hasn’t gotten the story straight. But if she was actually roofied, it wouldn’t be unusual for more than one man to take advantage.