Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems Wordio
Log In Create Account

Mom convicted in son's death

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Serious Business ▸ Mom convicted in son's death
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jul 26, 2011 1:52 PM
Mulva;841608 wrote:She got a year of probation. No jail time. Plus a chance to clear her name in a new trial.

http://news.yahoo.com/ga-mom-gets-probation-sons-jaywalking-death-152407635.html

That seems highly unusual...By offering a new trial, is the judge basically saying the jury was on crack?
Jul 26, 2011 1:52pm
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Jul 26, 2011 1:52 PM
Glory Days;841701 wrote:No, the lesson is use a crosswalk and not walk out into the middle of a 4 lane highway and stop in the median with your kids.
Exactly. that is the lesson and whomever said that what you quoted is a moron.
Jul 26, 2011 1:52pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jul 26, 2011 2:10 PM
I'm sure there's room in the federal budget to give cars to people who can't afford one.
Jul 26, 2011 2:10pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Jul 26, 2011 2:27 PM
Glory Days;841701 wrote:No, the lesson is use a crosswalk and not walk out into the middle of a 4 lane highway and stop in the median with your kids.

It wasn't a highway. If it were I'd think entirely different.
Jul 26, 2011 2:27pm
Mulva's avatar

Mulva

Senior Member

13,650 posts
Jul 26, 2011 3:20 PM
gut;841710 wrote:That seems highly unusual...By offering a new trial, is the judge basically saying the jury was on crack?

I was a little confused about that too. Obviously I don't have all of the facts of the case, but it seems to me that its a parents responsibility to not have their 4 year old child jaywalk across a highway. I'm not sure how that verdict could be overturned.

A year of probation seemed like a fair punishment to me though. I'm sure she's already punished herself enough already mentally.
Jul 26, 2011 3:20pm
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Jul 26, 2011 3:28 PM
gut;841710 wrote:That seems highly unusual...By offering a new trial, is the judge basically saying the jury was on crack?

I am not legal beagle, or is it legal eagle, but I think that if the judge really thought the case was total BS he can throw out the verdict, or, I think after the prosecution rests their case I think that defense routinely asks for it to be thrown out as they did not prove their burden. It rarely does, but is a formality.


I could be wrong though, and probably am
Jul 26, 2011 3:28pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jul 26, 2011 3:41 PM
thavoice;841831 wrote:I am not legal beagle, or is it legal eagle, but I think that if the judge really thought the case was total BS he can throw out the verdict, or, I think after the prosecution rests their case I think that defense routinely asks for it to be thrown out as they did not prove their burden. It rarely does, but is a formality.


I could be wrong though, and probably am
I think you're correct, but not a very politically popular thing to do. He may simply be acknowledging that she has some air-tight reason to get a new trial (which, again, not sure why the judge wouldn't have declared a mistrial unless maybe he thought she was going to be exonerated anyway).

And I don't know if the writer took some liberties, but for the judge to say "chance to clear your name" would indicate pretty strongly that he disagreed with the verdict.
Jul 26, 2011 3:41pm
Glory Days's avatar

Glory Days

Senior Member

7,809 posts
Jul 26, 2011 5:36 PM
WebFire;841758 wrote:It wasn't a highway. If it were I'd think entirely different.
by definition it is a highway. i know you thought i meant freeway though.
Jul 26, 2011 5:36pm