How much does a killer cop have to fuck up in order to spend actual time behind real bars? A whole lot, evidently: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...es-forcillo-will-report-to-prison-monday.html
This is an article I found that tries to explain the Kate Steinle Murder case. I'm not familiar with redstate dot com so I don't know if they have a history of bias or if they are just trying to explain a complicated situation. https://www.redstate.com/sarah-rumpf/2017/11/30/lied-kate-steinle-case/ But my reading of the details is that the prosecutor didn't do a good enough job educating the jurors that they could find him guilty of a range of charges from manslaughter all the way up to first degree murder.
I thought it was the judges job to educate and instruct the jury, not the prosecutors. Seems a little conflicty of interesty.
Where I get lost is in the definition of Involuntary Manslaughter....if someone dies as a result of you committing a crime (Misdemeanor or felony) you should be convicted of, at the very least, involuntary manslaughter. They found him guilty of a felony (Felon in possession of a firearm) and someone died as a result of him committing that felony. How can he be convicted of a felony with a death and not be convicted in any way with that death?
Honest question: Do y'all think the Kate Steinle case gets as much publicity if she wasn't an attractive female? Even assuming the perp was an illegal alien?
99 times out of 100, when there's a "grave miscarriage of justice" and some "thug" gets off, it's because the prosecutors fucked up. They either pressed for a more serious crime than the evidence supports, or did something stupid that opened a procedural loophole for the defense, or just plain bungled the case.
Meh... stupid drivers are universal. That being said, it's a shitty place to put the rock, because it's on the passenger side, and you can't see it from the driver's side for a fair bit of the approach to it. They would have been much better off putting in a light pole or something else that is view-able out of the passenger window.
God dammit, Hyde... https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/l...fired-netflixs-ranch-rape-allegations-1064353
He has a point, though, in his response: He flat-out denies it where as Kevin Spacey essentially admitted to being a scumbag. He wasnt convicted of anything and if the LADP is investigating a cover-up, wouldnt it make sense to wait until the investigation yields some damning results? The only thing I can think of with this one and many others is that there is more to the story than what is being released publicly.
Yep, I agree. I think a lot of these situations have a "worst kept secret" element to them to those that are close to the situation, and when action gets taken, those elements are included in the decision making process but don't necessarily make it to the media reports.
If Netflix knew about all of this -- and it's hard to believe they wouldn't while I did -- they really don't have a choice. Plenty of people have been fired for things that don't rise to the level of legal culpability, or for things that they later got acquitted from. If the LAPD drags its feet on this (the LAPD? Being slow to prosecute a famous and well-connected star? Shocking), Netflix just looks horrible letting somebody like that represent them.
The only caveat is, if he is truly innocent (I dont think he is, but devil's advocate) he has cause for a wrongful termination lawsuit assuming there are no indemnification clauses in his contract. So I guess economically, they would determine whether they are better off weathering the storm with him on board or rolling the dice and potentially taking a hit on the other side. On the LAPD point, I dont think they would hesitate protecting a star, especially if he is connected to Scientology. They have had some fairly shady practices when dealing with them. Particularly when they investigated the well-being of David Miscavige's wife, among other situations involving that church.
Well David said she's just fine, and if we can't trust the word of a megalomanical cult leader who constantly lies, who can we we trust anymore?
Except he's not really employed by Netflix... Netflix contracts to a Production company to produce content for them (headed by Ashton Kucher and a few writers he took from 2.5 men), and he's hired by them. So odds are Netflix basically said "get rid of him or we bail".
Apparently one Netflix exec was talking to a woman, and casually dropped that he just didn't believe the stories about Danny. Turns out he was talking to one of the four accusers. edited for source/accuracy