Self defense? Or not? - Apple River Stabbing

[Bonanza]

Bonanza, excellent summation of the goings on in this case. Makes it really clear how much doubt/confusion a jury will see in this mucked up case.

Thank god there's a person who said "oh yeah, i'm recording this whole thing right here!" and he didn't stop holding his phone in the incident, throughout.

Question tho, who/what/why determines what prosecutors are not allowed to bring into the courtroom... assuming said evidence is indeed factual?

Before a trial, we have what we call as "402s", which is jargon for motions in limine per CA rules of evidence. It's a big list of things the defense wants to keep from being shown at trial, and I'll also file motions to try and keep the defense from introducing, or laying out caselaw for things I want in.

Think of it like that scene in the Gladiator where Juaquin Phoenix stabs Russel Crow before their final fight-- each party wants to wound the other, knowing the crowd will never see the stab.

For instance, assume this cell phone camera. To get the footage itself in, I need to lay a foundation (questions to cameraguy- what is this? Who filmed it? On what camera? was it working? is this an accurate representation of what you saw? etc) and authenticate it (is this real or fabricated, and does it depict X that occurred on day Y?). Ok great. If I want the Jury to hear the audio, I need to find hearsay exceptions-- one for each voice. Anytime I try and introduce a statement that is not being made right then and there, it's hearsay. But I have ways to get them in through various "hearsay exceptions", of which there are many.

Let's say one of the victims uses a racial slur. I don't want the jury to see that, as they'll dislike my victim. I'll say it's irrelevant, and I'll ask to scrub it out. Conversely, let's say the defendant says "I've been to jail before, I'm not afraid of throwing down!"-- his attorney doesn't want the jury to hear the fact that he's been to jail, so that'll be scrubbed. But I want that in, to demonstrate the defendant's lack of fear for self defense, so I'll ask that I can show it-- knowing full well I just want the jury to hear he's been to jail. Judge isn't an idiot, and he knows what I want it in for, so he internally weighs that against the legitimate excuse I provide.

The charging document where the defendant's priors are listed? scrubbed. Criminal history? scrubbed. Tattoos covered, makeup provided for court? granted. Too many photos? I can only show 10 of 300. Too gory? I have to santize them.

Before the trial even begins, it's so watered down and cut up it's a shadow of it's former self. Motions in limine are designed to favor a defendant, so it's mostly a one way street. Basically you cry like Lebron James that everything's prejudicial, and chances are a lot of evidence gets stopped cold. Cases are won and lost in motions in limine.

 

[Steve300xcw]

did you just refer to yourself as a gladiator?

 

[Bonanza]

I’m curious about what you think of the (sober) female witness above a few posts. The way she answers makes her appear extremely credible. She makes short positive answers with no ambiguity. She doesn’t say things like “as best I recollect” or “I’m pretty sure”. If there was no video, I would totally believe her. But her contradictions to the video give me a complete opposite opinion of her. I would completely disregard everything she says. Do you think she was good for the prosecution?

There's never a more hurting time that seeing a witness give completely off-the-mark answers to certain questions, when a video completely disproves it. And for exactly the reason you mention. If you're my juror, I know you just saw and heard what I saw and heard. So here is where my little part in the performance comes in. In my opening, I would likely have let you know this is coming. Chaos begets chaos. I'll tell you straight up. Here's my little sample snippet:

"I'd be surprised if my witnesses all said the sky was blue and the water was green. But don't lose the forest for the trees. This case isn't about the color of X, or who stood where, or how many feet away Y was from Z. This is about whether that man (pointing at defendant) did (whatever I charged him with). You are the factfinders. You decide what the evidence is. The witnesses I will ask questions will do their best to be honest, but even honest people will blow it under these conditions. Even trained observers such as police will blow it. That's human nature. Look instead at whether there is a thread of consistency. Look for the evidence that matters. Ultimately, if the evidence you see makes you believe [defendant] is not guilty, it's your job to acquit him. But folks (see, we're friends!), this evidence, taken together, is going to tell only one story. That story begins and ends with that man committing (whatever I charged with him with). Listen to these folks. Look at this evidence. Only then will you see, and only then you too will know that man is guilty. And I'll ask you to find him guilty of all counts."

So then, to answer your question, I'd point out those items you noticed that made her seem credible. I'd minimize her mistakes as unimportant. I don't have time to watch that video at work for a thorough review of it, but hopefully this helps answer your question. Ultimately, I don't worry much about being hurt by witnesses. Everyone fucks up to some degree. If I know I have the right guy, charged the right way, then I'm doing my job. If I don't have the evidence to convict, than I shouldn't "win" anyway.

 

[Bonanza]

did you just refer to yourself as a gladiator?

If it were up to me, I'd be commodus, stabbing the shit out of everyone and putting my thumb on the scale.

 

[WashingtonMatt]

Before a trial, we have what we call as "402s", which is jargon for motions in limine per CA rules of evidence. It's a big list of things the defense wants to keep from being shown at trial, and I'll also file motions to try and keep the defense from introducing, or laying out caselaw for things I want in.

Think of it like that scene in the Gladiator where Juaquin Phoenix stabs Russel Crow before their final fight-- each party wants to wound the other, knowing the crowd will never see the stab.

For instance, assume this cell phone camera. To get the footage itself in, I need to lay a foundation (questions to cameraguy- what is this? Who filmed it? On what camera? was it working? is this an accurate representation of what you saw? etc) and authenticate it (is this real or fabricated, and does it depict X that occurred on day Y?). Ok great. If I want the Jury to hear the audio, I need to find hearsay exceptions-- one for each voice. Anytime I try and introduce a statement that is not being made right then and there, it's hearsay. But I have ways to get them in through various "hearsay exceptions", of which there are many.

Let's say one of the victims uses a racial slur. I don't want the jury to see that, as they'll dislike my victim. I'll say it's irrelevant, and I'll ask to scrub it out. Conversely, let's say the defendant says "I've been to jail before, I'm not afraid of throwing down!"-- his attorney doesn't want the jury to hear the fact that he's been to jail, so that'll be scrubbed. But I want that in, to demonstrate the defendant's lack of fear for self defense, so I'll ask that I can show it-- knowing full well I just want the jury to hear he's been to jail. Judge isn't an idiot, and he knows what I want it in for, so he internally weighs that against the legitimate excuse I provide.

The charging document where the defendant's priors are listed? scrubbed. Criminal history? scrubbed. Tattoos covered, makeup provided for court? granted. Too many photos? I can only show 10 of 300. Too gory? I have to santize them.

Before the trial even begins, it's so watered down and cut up it's a shadow of it's former self. Motions in limine are designed to favor a defendant, so it's mostly a one way street. Basically you cry like Lebron James that everything's prejudicial, and chances are a lot of evidence gets stopped cold. Cases are won and lost in motions in limine.

Sure doesn't seem like justice. In this case seeing the video in full with audio is the only way to get an accurate feel for the atmosphere at the time of the altercation. Based on the testimonies that I've been listening to, this guy wouldn't have a chance without the full video. There has been a lot of still frames presented, and transcripts of what was said. No way a jury can get to the truth like that.

Many years ago I was on a jury, I swear at times we had to exit the courtroom every couple minutes, then we'd re-enter and be told to discard what was said. Total BS.

 

[Bonanza]

Sure doesn't seem like justice. In this case seeing the video in full with audio is the only way to get an accurate feel for the atmosphere at the time of the altercation. Based on the testimonies that I've been listening to, this guys wouldn't have a chance without the full video. There has been a lot of still frames presented, and transcripts of what was said. No way a jury can get to the truth like that.

Many years an ago I was a on a jury, I swear at times we had to exit the courtroom every couple minutes, then we'd re-enter and be told to discard what was said. Total BS.

Yep. That's par for the course. I like to play everything and anything. Juries don't need help figuring things out. I just bring the DVD player, and figure out how to ask questions.

"You're honor, I'd like a sidebar".

-sigh-

During those sessions where you're sitting there, the defense attorney is crying foul about something and asking for a mistrial. That happens, no joke, in every case, every day, every witness, every piece of evidence.

 

[Elwenil]

I made up my mind a long time ago that if I were on a jury and was told to ignore something, that was exactly what I was going to base my decision on. Anything that they don't want me to hear seems like something more important that the rest of the nonsense.

Oddly, I was just called up for jury duty, but the boss said to get out of it, which was a fight but it ended up getting cancelled the day before anyway.

 

[SomeGuyFromOlympia]

if it happened, it should be in court
if names were called, that should be shown

I see a get-off-my-lawn met with summer time river fun, and idiots collided after a hurt feeling happened. Most likely the young ins out whited the guy verbally
Old people also think they own the water in front of their property. Typically as far as I know this is also not true, and know of only one case, even then it was the tide land and the owner cant do shit about people on the water. (it is a family member that purchased it in the Jurassic Period)

even I know, let them be loud and float by, the river will carry them away. I also grew up in the country and know when to shut my mouth, because sometimes it will be shut for you
Why stab the girl? Or anyone?? this guy is a bitch, I hope he gets ventilated in prison

 

[SomeGuyFromOlympia]

I made up my mind a long time ago that if I were on a jury and was told to ignore something, that was exactly what I was going to base my decision on. Anything that they don't want me to hear seems like something more important that the rest of the nonsense.

Oddly, I was just called up for jury duty, but the boss said to get out of it, which was a fight but it ended up getting cancelled the day before anyway.

you should let your boss go ahead and call in for you and let them know that he isn't going to let you go

 

[SomeGuyFromOlympia]

did you just refer to yourself as a gladiator?

 

[Yota Up]

if it happened, it should be in court

No, automatically it should not.
If the dead guy had a prison record, the jury should not hear about it if the guy that shot him claims self defense.
Unless the guy that shot him knew that as a fact at the time of the shooting.
If the shooter could not appreciate that as a fact, then neither should the jury, and as such, that evidence is inadmissible.

However, later on after the conviction, during sentencing phase, those records can be brought up with a 404(I think), and the sentence would be considered with the priors appreciated.

 

[Animalmother]

even I know, let them be loud and float by, the river will carry them away. I also grew up in the country and know when to shut my mouth, because sometimes it will be shut for you
Why stab the girl? Or anyone?? this guy is a bitch, I hope he gets ventilated in prison

On the flipside, why shove an old man and then sucker punch him when he is down in water? Its one thing to get knocked out its a whole other ballgame to get knocked out in the water and outnumbered. People act more bold when they are in a group opposed to by themselves and this group was drunk, feeding off each other and seemed content on going the chimp out route.

 

[rugger]

I made up my mind a long time ago that if I were on a jury and was told to ignore something, that was exactly what I was going to base my decision on. Anything that they don't want me to hear seems like something more important that the rest of the nonsense.

Oddly, I was just called up for jury duty, but the boss said to get out of it, which was a fight but it ended up getting cancelled the day before anyway.

Could have used you on a jury. I know someone that was convicted of sexual assault of a minor. He is a grown man giving driving lessons. She has tried this on four other teachers. Non of that history was admissable. It was her word against his. He was convicted. Judge knew the truth and sentenced him to time served. It is not justice.

 

[Poke]

Interesting. Did way more damage than I would have thought for that size. I thought it was like a 6" fixed blade from the little you could see it.

It’s why you charge someone who pulls a gun and run from someone who pulls a knife. Street smart 101.

 

[arse_sidewards]

I see a get-off-my-lawn met with summer time river fun, and idiots collided after a hurt feeling happened. Most likely the young ins out whited the guy verbally
Old people also think they own the water in front of their property. Typically as far as I know this is also not true, and know of only one case, even then it was the tide land and the owner cant do shit about people on the water. (it is a family member that purchased it in the Jurassic Period)

Yup. Other than a government office there is no higher concentration of assholes than waterfront property. Just entitled **** after entitled **** and everyone thinks the whole body of water should only be used in ways they approve of.

 

[arse_sidewards]

No, automatically it should not.
If the dead guy had a prison record, the jury should not hear about it if the guy that shot him claims self defense.
Unless the guy that shot him knew that as a fact at the time of the shooting.
If the shooter could not appreciate that as a fact, then neither should the jury, and as such, that evidence is inadmissible.

Eh, yes and no.

If the guy claiming self defense says "he was gonna rob me" and the dude's record is from drug dealing or DV or shit like that it's not really relevant.

Likewise if these teenagers have a history of picking fights the jury needs to see that.

 

[DMG]

Yup. Other than a government office there is no higher concentration of assholes than waterfront property. Just entitled ** after entitled ** and everyone thinks the whole body of water should only be used in ways they approve of.

if it happened, it should be in court
if names were called, that should be shown

I see a get-off-my-lawn met with summer time river fun, and idiots collided after a hurt feeling happened. Most likely the young ins out whited the guy verbally
Old people also think they own the water in front of their property. Typically as far as I know this is also not true, and know of only one case, even then it was the tide land and the owner cant do shit about people on the water. (it is a family member that purchased it in the Jurassic Period)

even I know, let them be loud and float by, the river will carry them away. I also grew up in the country and know when to shut my mouth, because sometimes it will be shut for you
Why stab the girl? Or anyone?? this guy is a bitch, I hope he gets ventilated in prison

Except he didn’t claim to own the water. He was tubing too. Why make up a scenario that didn’t exist?

And he didn’t start cutting until they had pushed him underwater a couple of times. Do you assclowns know what happens when you are held underwater? You can’t breathe.

 

[arse_sidewards]

Except he didn’t claim to own the water. He was tubing too. Why make up a scenario that didn’t exist?

My comments about the kind of people who own waterfront property are completely independent of this incident.

 

[redneckengineered]

Yup. Other than a government office there is no higher concentration of assholes than waterfront property. Just entitled ** after entitled ** and everyone thinks the whole body of water should only be used in ways they approve of.

jesus Do you own a bass boat?

 

[DMG]

My comments about the kind of people who own waterfront property are completely independent of this incident.

You were reinforcing the point of the guy saying it was what happened in this incident. I am aware of the issues with people that think they own navigable waterways as I fish and kayak.

 

[arse_sidewards]

Do you own a bass boat?

No. Thank fucking god. Zero desire to own anything bigger than a rowboat. Could stand to go from a 5hp to a 15 though.

And I will never own waterfront property. Fuck that.

 

[arse_sidewards]

You were reinforcing the point of the guy saying it was what happened in this incident.

Ok? And?

I'm tempted to think the drunk teenagers didn't realize the extent to which they were a threat to this guy and paid the price and he should walk.

I'm not sure which side of the debate that puts me on but I'll happily argue both sides.

 

[trampas]

I'll happily argue both sides.

I'll remove you from this thread

 

[redneckengineered]

No. Thank fucking god. Zero desire to own anything bigger than a rowboat. Could stand to go from a 5hp to a 15 though.

And I will never own waterfront property. Fuck that.

Yeah, it's terrible. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone

 

[KacksterK5]

jesus Do you own a bass boat?

Dude, that's exactly what I thought. Nobody more entitled than a Bass fisherman winging lures under a dock and saying how they're allowed to be there. Well, technically yes, but if two people are standing on a football field and one person can't move, the other guy decides to stand chest to chest and be annoying, the one who can't move will likely get pissed.

Kinda like Harley Davidson guys. Yes, you can be there, but don't be all annoying "FAG!!"

On topic. Self defense, the beginning of the video where he runs over is misleading, there's a current pushing everyone down river, you have to "run" to catch up. Apparently they were holding something like a phone and it kinda looks like he stumbles into their tubes at first. From what I read, the guy isn't from here and speaks 5 languages or something. He's probably not used to mumble rap listening high school and college kids who were barely passed through high school during covid and yell and hoot and holler unknown things out loud. Then, gets pushed down in the water, then slapped in the head, then pushed down again and outnumbered from high ground. I don't think you hear him say anything at all in the video that instigates anything, he seems to be just hovering around searching with his feet for the snorkel he just dropped when he tripped into the tubes.

Shitty kids, shitty parents, shitty situation, who lets their kid go to court with purple hair or wearing a hoodie???

 

[KacksterK5]

No. Thank fucking god. Zero desire to own anything bigger than a rowboat. Could stand to go from a 5hp to a 15 though.

And I will never own waterfront property. Fuck that.

Cool, Leave the big boat stuff and waterfront property to the professionals.

 

[arse_sidewards]

Yeah, it's terrible. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone

If you don't see why I wouldn't like it then you are one of "those people" that every lake has far too many of.

 

[redneckengineered]

If you don't see why I wouldn't like it then you are one of "those people" that every lake has far too many of.

Your sweeping generalization is so retarded I can't even respond to it intelligently

 

[KacksterK5]

If you don't see why I wouldn't like it then you are one of "those people" that every lake has far too many of.

Do you stare at ferris wheels a lot?

 

[WaterH]

……………… So then, to answer your question, I'd point out those items you noticed that made her seem credible. I'd minimize her mistakes as unimportant. I don't have time to watch that video at work for a thorough review of it, but hopefully this helps answer your question. Ultimately, I don't worry much about being hurt by witnesses. Everyone fucks up to some degree. If I know I have the right guy, charged the right way, then I'm doing my job. If I don't have the evidence to convict, than I shouldn't "win" anyway.

Thankyou for that.

Question, what about coaching a witness? I know it’s kind of illegal, but is done all the time. Would it be illegal for you to ask the witness (before trial) all the questions that will be asked. If they make a provable false statement, can you tell them to correct it or explain how it does not match with the evidence?