JGfromtheNW
Well-known member
Funny how a 30 year old man is still that petty on social media.
Sports Hernia":ei0bccmn said:Just think, you used to hate the guy. 8)Marvin49":ei0bccmn said:[tweet]https://twitter.com/RSherman_25/status/997192491072802816[/tweet]
kidhawk":1ofksn1w said:Marvin49":1ofksn1w said:kidhawk":1ofksn1w said:So, my question here is....was the video introduced at this hearing? Has it been verified at all?
All I've seen mention of is that is was 22 seconds long. I don't think it was shown in court. To be honest though, regardless of what is on the video (unless it can be proven to be falsified), what I'm seeing of what the Defense presented vs what the prosecution presented....you really gotta want him to be guilty to come away thinking he's guilty. Just my opinion.
What I'm reading now is pretty damning for her:
1) The person she flagged down said she had no visible injuries and she wasn't panicked at all.
2) 2 Cops were on scene. One of them said that her injuries didn't seem consistent with her description of him punching her 8-10 times. Keep in mind this was a PROSECUTION witness. The second cop when pressed on if the injuries were consistent with being punched by Foster 8-10 times said "Its not my job to have an opinion" and when pressed said "some people punch in different ways".
Huh?
She also said he seemed agitated when they arrived but I'd imagine just about anyone would be agitated if the cops were called and your girlfriend was telling them you hit her 8-10 times.
3) All accounts I've read from people in the room said this hearing overwhelmingly went Fosters way and seemed to exonerate him. Reporters who were in the room afterward asked the Lawyer when he was leaving "How does it feel to exonerate your client" and "Are you going to sue Ms. Ennis".
There are always going to be inconsistencies that a good lawyer can punch holes in, and he may well be innocent, the problem is that we can't believe her recant anymore than we can believe her original story. Right now, he (in my mind) is equally guilty and innocent. In other words, I wouldn't be able to say without a doubt either way. With her testimony so fatally flawed, for anyone looking at the situation without an agenda, it's hard to say he's innocent. There are just too many cases of battered women recanting for any number of reasons. The video, if it's out there and verifiable would be the proof that he'd need to say he's absolutely and 100% not guilty of this crime. That doesn't mean there's enough evidence to prosecute, and even if it gets dismissed at this point, that doesn't mean he's innocent, only that the prosecution didn't bring forth enough evidence.
Honestly, I can't say whether he's guilty or innocent, because too many times recanting is done for any number of reasons.
For selfish reasons, I would like the tape to be entered as evidence so it can be verified as authentic (or found to be fraudulent). Either way that would give me enough to have no doubt either way.
SoulfishHawk":12l0l1qy said:Sherm loves playing the victim, even if it's not him. Can't go 5 minutes w/out opening his trap and/or talking down to people.
Marvin49":f5ulnycp said:To be honest on all of this, while I can't say 100% that he didn't do it...
SoulfishHawk":fyf0dx5a said:Sherm loves playing the victim, even if it's not him. Can't go 5 minutes w/out opening his trap and/or talking down to people.
Popeyejones":egvj7dm6 said:SoulfishHawk":egvj7dm6 said:Sherm loves playing the victim, even if it's not him. Can't go 5 minutes w/out opening his trap and/or talking down to people.
How is this him playing the victim? His point is valid.
Heck, I'm the one who bumped the Foster thread when news of this arrest broke and the totality of my post was "CUT HIM NOW."
Yesterday after the pre-trial hearing even Tim friggin Kawakami offered a mea culpa and said he was wrong to argue that Foster should have been cut -- Kawkami's been around since I was a kid, and I've never seen him own up to being wrong before in my entire life. :lol:
Marvin49":2h7wku03 said:kidhawk":2h7wku03 said:Marvin49":2h7wku03 said:kidhawk":2h7wku03 said:So, my question here is....was the video introduced at this hearing? Has it been verified at all?
All I've seen mention of is that is was 22 seconds long. I don't think it was shown in court. To be honest though, regardless of what is on the video (unless it can be proven to be falsified), what I'm seeing of what the Defense presented vs what the prosecution presented....you really gotta want him to be guilty to come away thinking he's guilty. Just my opinion.
What I'm reading now is pretty damning for her:
1) The person she flagged down said she had no visible injuries and she wasn't panicked at all.
2) 2 Cops were on scene. One of them said that her injuries didn't seem consistent with her description of him punching her 8-10 times. Keep in mind this was a PROSECUTION witness. The second cop when pressed on if the injuries were consistent with being punched by Foster 8-10 times said "Its not my job to have an opinion" and when pressed said "some people punch in different ways".
Huh?
She also said he seemed agitated when they arrived but I'd imagine just about anyone would be agitated if the cops were called and your girlfriend was telling them you hit her 8-10 times.
3) All accounts I've read from people in the room said this hearing overwhelmingly went Fosters way and seemed to exonerate him. Reporters who were in the room afterward asked the Lawyer when he was leaving "How does it feel to exonerate your client" and "Are you going to sue Ms. Ennis".
There are always going to be inconsistencies that a good lawyer can punch holes in, and he may well be innocent, the problem is that we can't believe her recant anymore than we can believe her original story. Right now, he (in my mind) is equally guilty and innocent. In other words, I wouldn't be able to say without a doubt either way. With her testimony so fatally flawed, for anyone looking at the situation without an agenda, it's hard to say he's innocent. There are just too many cases of battered women recanting for any number of reasons. The video, if it's out there and verifiable would be the proof that he'd need to say he's absolutely and 100% not guilty of this crime. That doesn't mean there's enough evidence to prosecute, and even if it gets dismissed at this point, that doesn't mean he's innocent, only that the prosecution didn't bring forth enough evidence.
Honestly, I can't say whether he's guilty or innocent, because too many times recanting is done for any number of reasons.
For selfish reasons, I would like the tape to be entered as evidence so it can be verified as authentic (or found to be fraudulent). Either way that would give me enough to have no doubt either way.
I can't blame you for not accepting her recant, but for me its the nature of the recant and not the fact that she recanted that has me convinced.
I mean now neither cop nor the passerby can even say she had any physical signs of being hit.
She went to jail in 2011 for...wait for it...lying about an ex-boyfriend hitting her.
I also don't think the video would prove anything. The only way it makes a HUGE difference is if it was falsified.
I did learn a little more BTW:
The video was presented on an iPad by Fosters attorney to one of the detectives. Only the detective and Fosters Lawyer could see it. At NO POINT did the DA or any detective in the room question the validity of the video. The point there was to show that some scratches on her neck could have come from that fight with another woman.
Heres the problem though. Even if the video shows that diffinitively, that isn't proof that he never hit her. Its simply evidense that suggests any injuries she had could have come from someplace else.
Again tho...the important thing here is the video was used in the courtroom and NOBODY challenged its validity. They only questioned whether it explained injuries she had at the hospital.
This is kinda damning too...She recanted the story two days after the initial report and a point was made that there was no evidence of any contact between Foster and Ennis in that time. The detective that heard her initial recant admitted he NEVER INVESTIGATED her story and chose only to pursue evidence on Foster.
To be honest on all of this, while I can't say 100% that he didn't do it, Its really hard for me to envision the scenario in which she admits to having done it before, admits to stealing his Rolex, admits to stealing his clothes, admits to going back in the house after he was arrested and stealing his bank routing numbers, admits to following him around and taking pictures after the fact so she could sell them to TMZ...and for her to be lying about all of that.
All she had to do for him was say he didn't do it. Her Counsel advised her to plead the fifth so as not to incriminate herself.
She admitted to stuff she didn't need to admit.
In short...I think she needs help. It isn't really hard for me to say I think he's innocent because it isn't JUST her testimony that tells me that. I can't say that 100%, but honestly no matter what happens I don't think I'll ever be able to say he 100% didn't do it.
That's what sucks here. If he's innocent, it won't matter to many people. He'll always be guilty of having been accused. That'll be enough for many.
kidhawk":kkwwck42 said:Marvin49":kkwwck42 said:kidhawk":kkwwck42 said:Marvin49":kkwwck42 said:All I've seen mention of is that is was 22 seconds long. I don't think it was shown in court. To be honest though, regardless of what is on the video (unless it can be proven to be falsified), what I'm seeing of what the Defense presented vs what the prosecution presented....you really gotta want him to be guilty to come away thinking he's guilty. Just my opinion.
What I'm reading now is pretty damning for her:
1) The person she flagged down said she had no visible injuries and she wasn't panicked at all.
2) 2 Cops were on scene. One of them said that her injuries didn't seem consistent with her description of him punching her 8-10 times. Keep in mind this was a PROSECUTION witness. The second cop when pressed on if the injuries were consistent with being punched by Foster 8-10 times said "Its not my job to have an opinion" and when pressed said "some people punch in different ways".
Huh?
She also said he seemed agitated when they arrived but I'd imagine just about anyone would be agitated if the cops were called and your girlfriend was telling them you hit her 8-10 times.
3) All accounts I've read from people in the room said this hearing overwhelmingly went Fosters way and seemed to exonerate him. Reporters who were in the room afterward asked the Lawyer when he was leaving "How does it feel to exonerate your client" and "Are you going to sue Ms. Ennis".
There are always going to be inconsistencies that a good lawyer can punch holes in, and he may well be innocent, the problem is that we can't believe her recant anymore than we can believe her original story. Right now, he (in my mind) is equally guilty and innocent. In other words, I wouldn't be able to say without a doubt either way. With her testimony so fatally flawed, for anyone looking at the situation without an agenda, it's hard to say he's innocent. There are just too many cases of battered women recanting for any number of reasons. The video, if it's out there and verifiable would be the proof that he'd need to say he's absolutely and 100% not guilty of this crime. That doesn't mean there's enough evidence to prosecute, and even if it gets dismissed at this point, that doesn't mean he's innocent, only that the prosecution didn't bring forth enough evidence.
Honestly, I can't say whether he's guilty or innocent, because too many times recanting is done for any number of reasons.
For selfish reasons, I would like the tape to be entered as evidence so it can be verified as authentic (or found to be fraudulent). Either way that would give me enough to have no doubt either way.
I can't blame you for not accepting her recant, but for me its the nature of the recant and not the fact that she recanted that has me convinced.
I mean now neither cop nor the passerby can even say she had any physical signs of being hit.
She went to jail in 2011 for...wait for it...lying about an ex-boyfriend hitting her.
I also don't think the video would prove anything. The only way it makes a HUGE difference is if it was falsified.
I did learn a little more BTW:
The video was presented on an iPad by Fosters attorney to one of the detectives. Only the detective and Fosters Lawyer could see it. At NO POINT did the DA or any detective in the room question the validity of the video. The point there was to show that some scratches on her neck could have come from that fight with another woman.
Heres the problem though. Even if the video shows that diffinitively, that isn't proof that he never hit her. Its simply evidense that suggests any injuries she had could have come from someplace else.
Again tho...the important thing here is the video was used in the courtroom and NOBODY challenged its validity. They only questioned whether it explained injuries she had at the hospital.
This is kinda damning too...She recanted the story two days after the initial report and a point was made that there was no evidence of any contact between Foster and Ennis in that time. The detective that heard her initial recant admitted he NEVER INVESTIGATED her story and chose only to pursue evidence on Foster.
To be honest on all of this, while I can't say 100% that he didn't do it, Its really hard for me to envision the scenario in which she admits to having done it before, admits to stealing his Rolex, admits to stealing his clothes, admits to going back in the house after he was arrested and stealing his bank routing numbers, admits to following him around and taking pictures after the fact so she could sell them to TMZ...and for her to be lying about all of that.
All she had to do for him was say he didn't do it. Her Counsel advised her to plead the fifth so as not to incriminate herself.
She admitted to stuff she didn't need to admit.
In short...I think she needs help. It isn't really hard for me to say I think he's innocent because it isn't JUST her testimony that tells me that. I can't say that 100%, but honestly no matter what happens I don't think I'll ever be able to say he 100% didn't do it.
That's what sucks here. If he's innocent, it won't matter to many people. He'll always be guilty of having been accused. That'll be enough for many.
That bit about the video being played at trial tells me more than anything that she could have said on the stand. Right now, her testimony is weak and I couldn't find her to be a reliable witness for the prosecution or the defense. The fact that the video was played without objection, tells me that it's more than likely valid. It's still not a 100% either way, but as things stand today, I wouldn't convict him (if I were a jurist). Of course there is still the outstanding gun charge, and I haven't heard much about that. Doesn't really make sense to go after such a weak DV case and not the gun charge. That's likely where there may be a conviction out of all this (or a plea).
Marvin49":1gt277ee said:1) The Ammunition (large Magazine) charge has already been dropped.
2) While the weapon is illegal in CA, it was purchased legally in Alabama. Likely that charge is reduced to misdemeanor.
Another interesting note...one of the charges was in regards to him destroying her Cell phone when she tried to call 911.
1) I dunno how the law would treat someone destroying property to prevent another person from falsely accusing you.
2) She said during her testimony that it wasn't her phone. It was his. It was in his name and he paid the bill.
No clue whatsoever how that would be handled legally.
kidhawk":nayc2y2q said:Marvin49":nayc2y2q said:1) The Ammunition (large Magazine) charge has already been dropped.
2) While the weapon is illegal in CA, it was purchased legally in Alabama. Likely that charge is reduced to misdemeanor.
Another interesting note...one of the charges was in regards to him destroying her Cell phone when she tried to call 911.
1) I dunno how the law would treat someone destroying property to prevent another person from falsely accusing you.
2) She said during her testimony that it wasn't her phone. It was his. It was in his name and he paid the bill.
No clue whatsoever how that would be handled legally.
I would have expected it to be a misdemeanor from what I'd read, but the evidence of his possessing the weapon illegally is irrefutable. The only way I could see this not reaching a conviction is if they screwed up the process of finding the gun in the first place and it got tossed out that way. Otherwise I can easily see that becoming a plea deal with a fine and suspended sentence (max)
As for the information about the phone. That makes for an interesting topic of thought really. I am not sure how I feel about it. I am torn, because no matter the phone, if someone is dialing 911, nobody should forcibly stop that. IMO, the ownership of the phone shouldn't really matter in that case. The fact that she was calling to file a false report, also shouldn't matter, as that is for the police to deal with and not for an individual to decide on the spot. With that said, I'd want to know exactly what transpired. Did he assault her to get the phone away from her? If he did, then just in that, he's committed a crime. No doubt, it's a tough scenario to think through all the possibilities.
kidhawk":2hbpr56w said:Marvin49":2hbpr56w said:1) The Ammunition (large Magazine) charge has already been dropped.
2) While the weapon is illegal in CA, it was purchased legally in Alabama. Likely that charge is reduced to misdemeanor.
Another interesting note...one of the charges was in regards to him destroying her Cell phone when she tried to call 911.
1) I dunno how the law would treat someone destroying property to prevent another person from falsely accusing you.
2) She said during her testimony that it wasn't her phone. It was his. It was in his name and he paid the bill.
No clue whatsoever how that would be handled legally.
I would have expected it to be a misdemeanor from what I'd read, but the evidence of his possessing the weapon illegally is irrefutable. The only way I could see this not reaching a conviction is if they screwed up the process of finding the gun in the first place and it got tossed out that way. Otherwise I can easily see that becoming a plea deal with a fine and suspended sentence (max)
As for the information about the phone. That makes for an interesting topic of thought really. I am not sure how I feel about it. I am torn, because no matter the phone, if someone is dialing 911, nobody should forcibly stop that. IMO, the ownership of the phone shouldn't really matter in that case. The fact that she was calling to file a false report, also shouldn't matter, as that is for the police to deal with and not for an individual to decide on the spot. With that said, I'd want to know exactly what transpired. Did he assault her to get the phone away from her? If he did, then just in that, he's committed a crime. No doubt, it's a tough scenario to think through all the possibilities.
seahawkfreak":bv615n30 said:So there is due process? Or should we just believe what women say automatically because they are women and should be believed without being questioned?
Or should we just let the media just prosecute the allegations because we all know the allegation is just as bad as the crime,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,right?
There's also PRISON waiting for her based on her testimony, where she got up there and confessed to several CRIMES.JGfromtheNW":29ol5nyk said:Honestly, and this is probably just the cynic in me, I think it's far more likely she's recanting because there's money with her name on it if Foster is cleared than anything else.
Victims of DV do this type of stuff - even when there isn't massive financial gain to be had like in this situation. They go back on what they said, they say it's their own fault for things escalating, they say things didn't actually happen the way they initially explained it, they say that they somehow already had their injuries, etc. They stop working with the prosecutors and then the next thing we know the perp. gets a slap on the wrist.
Even if this all blows over, I would never trust Foster moving forward. I'm not rooting for his demise, but I would be surprised if he straightened up and didn't have trouble continue to follow him.
If this is true she needs to go to prison for a long time.Marvin49":oou0igy8 said:A bit more from the hearing....
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LombardiHimself/status/997573461999472640[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LombardiHimself/status/997578605398917120[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LombardiHimself/status/997904364923572224[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LombardiHimself/status/997904658432577536[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LombardiHimself/status/997906387777736705[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LombardiHimself/status/997906979338137601[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LombardiHimself/status/997907201829191680[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LombardiHimself/status/997908183342460928[/tweet]
If it's 50/50 then there is not only reasonable doubt, there isn't even probable cause.kidhawk":3kz60efu said:Marvin49":3kz60efu said:kidhawk":3kz60efu said:So, my question here is....was the video introduced at this hearing? Has it been verified at all?
All I've seen mention of is that is was 22 seconds long. I don't think it was shown in court. To be honest though, regardless of what is on the video (unless it can be proven to be falsified), what I'm seeing of what the Defense presented vs what the prosecution presented....you really gotta want him to be guilty to come away thinking he's guilty. Just my opinion.
What I'm reading now is pretty damning for her:
1) The person she flagged down said she had no visible injuries and she wasn't panicked at all.
2) 2 Cops were on scene. One of them said that her injuries didn't seem consistent with her description of him punching her 8-10 times. Keep in mind this was a PROSECUTION witness. The second cop when pressed on if the injuries were consistent with being punched by Foster 8-10 times said "Its not my job to have an opinion" and when pressed said "some people punch in different ways".
Huh?
She also said he seemed agitated when they arrived but I'd imagine just about anyone would be agitated if the cops were called and your girlfriend was telling them you hit her 8-10 times.
3) All accounts I've read from people in the room said this hearing overwhelmingly went Fosters way and seemed to exonerate him. Reporters who were in the room afterward asked the Lawyer when he was leaving "How does it feel to exonerate your client" and "Are you going to sue Ms. Ennis".
There are always going to be inconsistencies that a good lawyer can punch holes in, and he may well be innocent, the problem is that we can't believe her recant anymore than we can believe her original story. Right now, he (in my mind) is equally guilty and innocent. In other words, I wouldn't be able to say without a doubt either way. With her testimony so fatally flawed, for anyone looking at the situation without an agenda, it's hard to say he's innocent. There are just too many cases of battered women recanting for any number of reasons. The video, if it's out there and verifiable would be the proof that he'd need to say he's absolutely and 100% not guilty of this crime. That doesn't mean there's enough evidence to prosecute, and even if it gets dismissed at this point, that doesn't mean he's innocent, only that the prosecution didn't bring forth enough evidence.
Honestly, I can't say whether he's guilty or innocent, because too many times recanting is done for any number of reasons.
For selfish reasons, I would like the tape to be entered as evidence so it can be verified as authentic (or found to be fraudulent). Either way that would give me enough to have no doubt either way.
5_Golden_Rings":2epr0utd said:If it's 50/50 then there is not only reasonable doubt, there isn't even probable cause.kidhawk":2epr0utd said:Marvin49":2epr0utd said:kidhawk":2epr0utd said:So, my question here is....was the video introduced at this hearing? Has it been verified at all?
All I've seen mention of is that is was 22 seconds long. I don't think it was shown in court. To be honest though, regardless of what is on the video (unless it can be proven to be falsified), what I'm seeing of what the Defense presented vs what the prosecution presented....you really gotta want him to be guilty to come away thinking he's guilty. Just my opinion.
What I'm reading now is pretty damning for her:
1) The person she flagged down said she had no visible injuries and she wasn't panicked at all.
2) 2 Cops were on scene. One of them said that her injuries didn't seem consistent with her description of him punching her 8-10 times. Keep in mind this was a PROSECUTION witness. The second cop when pressed on if the injuries were consistent with being punched by Foster 8-10 times said "Its not my job to have an opinion" and when pressed said "some people punch in different ways".
Huh?
She also said he seemed agitated when they arrived but I'd imagine just about anyone would be agitated if the cops were called and your girlfriend was telling them you hit her 8-10 times.
3) All accounts I've read from people in the room said this hearing overwhelmingly went Fosters way and seemed to exonerate him. Reporters who were in the room afterward asked the Lawyer when he was leaving "How does it feel to exonerate your client" and "Are you going to sue Ms. Ennis".
There are always going to be inconsistencies that a good lawyer can punch holes in, and he may well be innocent, the problem is that we can't believe her recant anymore than we can believe her original story. Right now, he (in my mind) is equally guilty and innocent. In other words, I wouldn't be able to say without a doubt either way. With her testimony so fatally flawed, for anyone looking at the situation without an agenda, it's hard to say he's innocent. There are just too many cases of battered women recanting for any number of reasons. The video, if it's out there and verifiable would be the proof that he'd need to say he's absolutely and 100% not guilty of this crime. That doesn't mean there's enough evidence to prosecute, and even if it gets dismissed at this point, that doesn't mean he's innocent, only that the prosecution didn't bring forth enough evidence.
Honestly, I can't say whether he's guilty or innocent, because too many times recanting is done for any number of reasons.
For selfish reasons, I would like the tape to be entered as evidence so it can be verified as authentic (or found to be fraudulent). Either way that would give me enough to have no doubt either way.