COMMONWEALTH vs GEORGE HOPKINS 10-23-19

[JimF-LowBari]

13 hours ago, MikeD said:

Don't forget, he would be much more open with his own legal team than he would be in a public pronunciation. I would guess that the article might shape his defense to some degree, but how much? Depends on what else this team may have as a defense to create "reasonable doubt", which is all he needs, don't forget.

 

I just wonder how much his legal team was in on the article. I don’t see how a social media post would really help. If a potential juror saw it and formed a guilty/not guilty bias based the article that juror should be excluded. 
I can see his legal team saying “George take our advice... shut up”

[Weaklefthand4ever]

33 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

I can see his legal team saying “George take our advice... shut up”

But as I think we can all agree on Jim, when people are so narcissistic that they believe themselves to be the only voice in the room....shutting up is simply not an option for them. They don't need "advice from people who aren't as smart as them." I generally let them create their own fires and then sit back and watch them burn up in them. That's why I like the corporate world so much I think. SO many fires...SO many attitude adjustments. 

[JimF-LowBari]

18 minutes ago, Weaklefthand4ever said:

But as I think we can all agree on Jim, when people are so narcissistic that they believe themselves to be the only voice in the room....shutting up is simply not an option for them. They don't need "advice from people who aren't as smart as them." I generally let them create their own fires and then sit back and watch them burn up in them. That's why I like the corporate world so much I think. SO many fires...SO many attitude adjustments. 

Oh I would never say GH would listen... I pictured GH being so “down” with all the “injustice” to ME he had to vent.... And I see it in govt too much, i was picked/elected to this job so I know it all

Edited October 26, 2019 by JimF-LowBari

[FTNK]

13 hours ago, MikeD said:

We should not forget what the charges are as well...two women who worked for YEA in 2008 and 2010. How much...if any...of the rest is permitted into evidence to establish a pattern of prior acts is up to the judge, same as with the Cosby case. 

I don’t know if it is allowed as a factor but there are another 10 accusers

[IllianaLancerContra]

6 hours ago, FTNK said:

I don’t know if it is allowed as a factor but there are another 10 accusers

True, but the other 10 are either outside the Statute of Limitations, from other jurisdictions, or both.

Time will tell as to whether the judge will allow their testimony, but I wouldn't count on it.

Edited October 26, 2019 by IllianaLancerContra

[MikeD]

4 hours ago, FTNK said:

I don’t know if it is allowed as a factor but there are another 10 accusers

Yes, but those are outside the statute of limitations and at least some are not located in PA.

I think in the Cosby case a few of his accusers were permitted to give some level of testimony in court to establish prior conduct, but that was it. They were not part of the indictment. That is about all those other 10 would be able to do, depending on how much the judge lets in. I would guess the prosecution will lobby for as much as possible, while Hopkins' team will look to exclude them all. 

A potentially interesting possibility here in NJ is that there is a new law going into effect that greatly expands the ability of a long-distant-in-time victim to get their day in court. At least some of them happened in NJ (to the members back in the early 80's). Be interesting to see how, and even if, that plays out in future court cases. 

 

 

 

 

[Terri Schehr]

37 minutes ago, MikeD said:

 

A potentially interesting possibility here in NJ is that there is a new law going into effect that greatly expands the ability of a long-distant-in-time victim to get their day in court. At least some of them happened in NJ (to the members back in the early 80's). Be interesting to see how, and even if, that plays out in future court cases. 

 

 

 

 

I was just going to mention that.  I thought I read somewhere that they’re lobbying for that in Pennsylvania, too. 

Texas recently toughened penalties for groping.  In the past, it was a class C misdemeanor punishable by a $500 fine. It’s now a class A misdemeanor indecent assault with penalties of up to one year in jail and a $4000 fine. 

[Ghost]

43 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said:

 Texas recently toughened penalties for groping.  In the past, it was a class C misdemeanor punishable by a $500 fine. It’s now a class A misdemeanor indecent assault with penalties of up to one year in jail and a $4000 fine. 

Hang 'em high!

[DFA1970]

On 10/24/2019 at 6:27 AM, greg_orangecounty said:

####. 12 women are accusing him?  Those are Bill Cosby numbers. Hope justice is served by whatever the outcome is. 

But the charges and trial is based on two accusers...not 12. So the other 10 are not part this court case. 

[Tim K]

16 minutes ago, DFA1970 said:

But the charges and trial is based on two accusers...not 12. So the other 10 are not part this court case. 

In most criminal cases other accusations are inadmissible, though the right prosecutor can often make a good argument that they be included. In civil cases, lawyers can use other accusations to prove a pattern of behavior.