Home
THIS SITE
  About Phins.com
  Contact Us
  Staff
TEAM NEWS
  Team Info
  Twitter Feeds
  News Wire
  XML News
  Subscribe using any news reader
  News Articles
  Mobile News
  On Porpoise
GAMES
  Schedule
PERSONNEL
  Roster
  Depth Chart
  Training Camp
  Draft
FOR THE FANS
  Forums
  Places To Watch
  Dolphins Links
  Game Tickets
HISTORY
  Team History
  1972 Tribute
  News Archive
  Past Games
  Transactions
  Past Rosters
SUPPORT PHINS.COM
  Dolphins Fan Shop
  Phins.com Apparel
 
-- Advertisement --
Privacy Policy at Phins.com
 
  Phins.com Phorums
    News Wire | Roster | Depth Chart | Last/Next Game | Schedule | Links  
          brandon marshall stabbed!
Miami Dolphins Civilized Discussion :  Phins.com Phorums The fastest message board... ever.
This is a moderated phorum for the CIVILIZED discussion of the Miami Dolphins. In this phorum, there are rules and moderators to make sure you abide by the rules. The moderators for this phorum are JC and Colonel
Pages: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 3 of 4
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: Mia1 ()
Date: April 24, 2011 04:26AM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Date: April 24, 2011 07:52AM

Mia1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
> HEHEhehe lol



And I didn't mean smoke a bowl with him either..........smoking smiley

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: Mia1 ()
Date: April 24, 2011 08:26AM

Its ok Its funny.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 24, 2011 10:14AM

Well, Crowder, the news I heard was slightly different. I heard that, in fact, the wife did say it was self-defense. But again, like I said, if I were a cop, I couldn't take it upon myself to believe that on the spot and let her go only to find out the next day that she had left the jurisdiction. So the fact that she was not let go does not mean she was not engaged in self-defense.

Oh, I don't disagree that the wife inflicted the injuries. Without a doubt she did. She admitted it. But she did say it was in self-defense.

If she didn't have any marks of injury, which I accepted she didn't, that does not mean she was not defending herself, particularly if he had a past history of abuse. Again, look at the video on youtube about his former girlfriend, Watley. He continuously beat her and was arrested time and time again only to have her get back together with him. Look at Watley's father cry on the video about how his daughter suffered. (I only have two sons but I am so overprotective even about them that I KNOW I would be in jail for murder if someone touched a daughter of mine).

The defensive wounds on Marshall's hands does not preclude that there was also self-defense. Let's suppose someone has had the habit of beating the hell out of the woman and she sees that gleam in his eye, only not the gleam that he wants sex but the gleam that he is about to get off on beating her. He approaches her and she pulls a knife out from the back of body and lunges toward him.

What's he going do? Even though he was the aggressor, he's not going to stand there and get stabbed in the chest, he's going to raise his hand in defense. Those hands are going to get sliced.

Yes, even aggressors can have defensive wounds.

It's not so black and white as laymen think.

This would be the type of trial where the woman would get acquitted and most of you layman would think that it was just another instance of our justice system letting the guilty go.

But sometimes the aggressor DOES GET THE WORSE OF IT. Just because the aggressor gets wounded and the victim is arrested, that doesn't mean that the guy who got the worse of it was innocent and the guy who got arrested wasn't the victim. And I'm a prosecutor saying that.

But my best prediction is that you can believe what charges are settled upon in a few days. If she is not prosecuted, then the DA and the police have probably figured that she was being attacked. The other possibility is that given his past history, the DA might figure he can never win a prosecution on her because the defense certainly would be able to bring up his domestic violence against Watley and against his own father and that would so incline the jury to believe that it was self-defense that there would be no point wasting the taxpayers' money by prosecuting her.

Now, as far as having his back, if you mean so that we don't deflate the value of our own ability to trade him, I certainly would not AND NEVER MEANT TO imply that we should publicly fire him and denounce him. That would be stupid tradewise.

But if you and the other "stand by him" people think we should really love him and support him like a member of the family, then please re-read DolphanMark's post.

This guy doesn't care for anybody but himself.

Randy Moss is a head-case. But Moss's mainly a head-case on the field, he wants the ball everytime it is thrown. So does Brandon Marshall. But there the similarity ends. I don't remember Moss ever costing a game by his on the field antics. I mean, he may have done so by throwing a punch. Every athlete lets his temper get the better of him. But to insult the refs, that's showing that you can't control yourself when someone does something negative to you. Get it? Like a wife or girlfriend defying you so you slap them around?

So, yeah, say he's a great guy and we're standing by him but that's the public face. The private face of me would be (unlikely to resolve CBA before draft but if you could) trade his but for a second round draft choice. But given the CBA, after it is settled, trade his butt for a quarterback if we don't draft one or for some other player who might be on the downside of his career.

But this guy is trouble and if he gets suspended either for a long time or permanently, then we're going to have to eat it. Although I recognize that another team would have to be pretty stupid not to see the same thing I see.

Hey, as many problems as our team has (which I have been saying over and over in defense of Henne), do you think that I WANT to have to cover another position, such as wide receiver? I realized the guy was a jerk but I thought we just had to put up with him. But I see know the risk is too high.

And although I don't think Julio Jones will drop to us, if he does, I'd say grab him and hope to pick up another running back besides Ingram and hope to fill o-line in later rounds.

As for your plan to cure him, TreasureCoast, you are taking on a tall order. If this were September and the regular season had started, I'd be inclined to agree that that might be the best alternative. But at this time when moving players is at an optimum (lack of CBA aside), I say now is the time to dump him and get the best value.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: Mia1 ()
Date: April 24, 2011 11:36AM

Well he is a dirtbag with ladies.

Again why is he this way, I blame parent's, or well how he was raised.

Ne needs anger management. He should be forced to engage in anger management every year for at least a month.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Date: April 24, 2011 12:57PM

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, Crowder, the news I heard was slightly
> different. I heard that, in fact, the wife did say
> it was self-defense. But again, like I said, if I
> were a cop, I couldn't take it upon myself to
> believe that on the spot and let her go only to
> find out the next day that she had left the
> jurisdiction. So the fact that she was not let go
> does not mean she was not engaged in
> self-defense.
>
> Oh, I don't disagree that the wife inflicted the
> injuries. Without a doubt she did. She admitted
> it. But she did say it was in self-defense.
>
> If she didn't have any marks of injury, which I
> accepted she didn't, that does not mean she was
> not defending herself, particularly if he had a
> past history of abuse. Again, look at the video
> on youtube about his former girlfriend, Watley.
> He continuously beat her and was arrested time and
> time again only to have her get back together with
> him. Look at Watley's father cry on the video
> about how his daughter suffered. (I only have two
> sons but I am so overprotective even about them
> that I KNOW I would be in jail for murder if
> someone touched a daughter of mine).
>
> The defensive wounds on Marshall's hands does not
> preclude that there was also self-defense. Let's
> suppose someone has had the habit of beating the
> hell out of the woman and she sees that gleam in
> his eye, only not the gleam that he wants sex but
> the gleam that he is about to get off on beating
> her. He approaches her and she pulls a knife out
> from the back of body and lunges toward him.
>
> What's he going do? Even though he was the
> aggressor, he's not going to stand there and get
> stabbed in the chest, he's going to raise his hand
> in defense. Those hands are going to get sliced.
>
>
> Yes, even aggressors can have defensive wounds.
>
> It's not so black and white as laymen think.
>
> This would be the type of trial where the woman
> would get acquitted and most of you layman would
> think that it was just another instance of our
> justice system letting the guilty go.
>
> But sometimes the aggressor DOES GET THE WORSE OF
> IT. Just because the aggressor gets wounded and
> the victim is arrested, that doesn't mean that the
> guy who got the worse of it was innocent and the
> guy who got arrested wasn't the victim. And I'm a
> prosecutor saying that.
>
> But my best prediction is that you can believe
> what charges are settled upon in a few days. If
> she is not prosecuted, then the DA and the police
> have probably figured that she was being attacked.
> The other possibility is that given his past
> history, the DA might figure he can never win a
> prosecution on her because the defense certainly
> would be able to bring up his domestic violence
> against Watley and against his own father and that
> would so incline the jury to believe that it was
> self-defense that there would be no point wasting
> the taxpayers' money by prosecuting her.
>
> Now, as far as having his back, if you mean so
> that we don't deflate the value of our own ability
> to trade him, I certainly would not AND NEVER
> MEANT TO imply that we should publicly fire him
> and denounce him. That would be stupid
> tradewise.
>
> But if you and the other "stand by him" people
> think we should really love him and support him
> like a member of the family, then please re-read
> DolphanMark's post.
>
> This guy doesn't care for anybody but himself.
>
> Randy Moss is a head-case. But Moss's mainly a
> head-case on the field, he wants the ball
> everytime it is thrown. So does Brandon Marshall.
> But there the similarity ends. I don't remember
> Moss ever costing a game by his on the field
> antics. I mean, he may have done so by throwing a
> punch. Every athlete lets his temper get the
> better of him. But to insult the refs, that's
> showing that you can't control yourself when
> someone does something negative to you. Get it?
> Like a wife or girlfriend defying you so you slap
> them around?
>
> So, yeah, say he's a great guy and we're standing
> by him but that's the public face. The private
> face of me would be (unlikely to resolve CBA
> before draft but if you could) trade his but for a
> second round draft choice. But given the CBA,
> after it is settled, trade his butt for a
> quarterback if we don't draft one or for some
> other player who might be on the downside of his
> career.
>
> But this guy is trouble and if he gets suspended
> either for a long time or permanently, then we're
> going to have to eat it. Although I recognize
> that another team would have to be pretty stupid
> not to see the same thing I see.
>
> Hey, as many problems as our team has (which I
> have been saying over and over in defense of
> Henne), do you think that I WANT to have to cover
> another position, such as wide receiver? I
> realized the guy was a jerk but I thought we just
> had to put up with him. But I see know the risk
> is too high.
>
> And although I don't think Julio Jones will drop
> to us, if he does, I'd say grab him and hope to
> pick up another running back besides Ingram and
> hope to fill o-line in later rounds.
>
> As for your plan to cure him, TreasureCoast, you
> are taking on a tall order. If this were
> September and the regular season had started, I'd
> be inclined to agree that that might be the best
> alternative. But at this time when moving players
> is at an optimum (lack of CBA aside), I say now is
> the time to dump him and get the best value.




Dude , in all fairness thats alot of speculation on your behalf. Gleam in the eyes? Taking a knife and plunging it into someones abdomin is a desperate act , that we can both agree on. But for that kind of proof, you need to show your life was threatened. For there not to be a mark on her shows that it was not pysical abuse . He had a girlfriend. Women do get Nutz about those things. Look what happened to poor Steve Mcnair when he tried to break it off with a chick. .357 in the skull. You can posture all you want about his past , what coulda. shoulda happened, but in the end we have to deal with cold hard facts.

Fact# 1 Brandon Marshall has a stab wound, and defensive marks on both hands.

Fact# 2 wife has none. na da. Zip, doughnuts.

Which story is consistant with the Physical evidence found on scene? Pics were taken of all wounds, statements made at the scene.

Domestic incidents are the most dangerous that law enforcment faces. More cops die during Domestic violence issues then any other incident except for car crashes for a reason.

Bitch was nuts. The fact that Brandon never laid a hand on her is the only reason I'm behind him.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: berkeley223 ()
Date: April 24, 2011 01:15PM

I doubt he "never" laid a hand on her, but in this case it doesn't look like he did. Only thing that would change this is if he was pointing a gun at her and she stabbed him in self defense---but I think the presence of a gun would have been noted in the police report don't you?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: montequi ()
Date: April 24, 2011 01:18PM

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fact# 1 Brandon Marshall has a stab wound, and
> defensive marks on both hands.
>
> Fact# 2 wife has none. na da. Zip, doughnuts.
>
> Which story is consistant with the Physical
> evidence found on scene? Pics were taken of all
> wounds, statements made at the scene.
>
> Domestic incidents are the most dangerous that law
> enforcment faces. More cops die during Domestic
> violence issues then any other incident except for
> car crashes for a reason.
>
> Bitch was nuts. The fact that Brandon never laid a
> hand on her is the only reason I'm behind him.

Exactly!! It doesn't matter what he said to her. SHE took it to the next level. I know first-hand how a woman can respond physically to a verbal argument. Any counselor or law enforcement official will tell you that getting physical in a situation like this is unacceptable. Sometimes men do, sometimes women do. If a woman can't handle how a man talks to her, she has the option of leaving. Taking a knife and stabbing him is unacceptable in ANY court of law.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 24, 2011 01:24PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 24, 2011 01:34PM

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I doubt he "never" laid a hand on her, but in this
> case it doesn't look like he did. Only thing that
> would change this is if he was pointing a gun at
> her and she stabbed him in self defense---but I
> think the presence of a gun would have been noted
> in the police report don't you?


RESPONSE: berk, I defer to you on civil matters but you're in my field now. Yes, the law is that you are not entitled to use deadly force unless confronted with similar force. But as I point out, a woman can get beat to death by a man even though that man does not use a gun or a knife. She doesn't have to stand there and get beat to death even though there is a knife handy.

Moreover, even you would concede that if one man is in the throes of being strangled to death with a cloth, he is entitled to use a knife a gun or a bat.

Similarly, a woman is entitled to use a bat to repel an attack by a man who she can demonstrate would beat her severely.

If he is down on the ground and has been temporarily crippled, can she use a bat or a knife? No.

The amount of force allowed is that reasonably necessary to repel the threat.

It seems that all of you guys have taken the simple fact that she stabbed him and she has no marks and that settles it for you.

She was crazy and wrong and he is not to blame.

I have two suggestions. Go to Yahoo.com. Then Click on Sports. Then Click on Outside the Lines. Then play the YouTube Video of Brandon Marshall's Past troubles.

If you guys then that an abuser of this class changes his stripes, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I can sell you that would make you wealthier than Donald Trump.

(Not saying that he was not totally innocent in this incident but I'd say that the odds are very much against it.)

Lastly, don't have a heart attack if the local District Attorney drops the charges on the wife.

....and they don't have to arrest him. If she responded by stabbing him "in reasonable fear of her safety" then the fact that he only threatened but did not commit a battery would mean that he would not be arrested either.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/2011 01:57PM by ChyrenB.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: Crowder52 ()
Date: April 24, 2011 02:17PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 24, 2011 03:24PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: montequi ()
Date: April 24, 2011 03:28PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 24, 2011 03:44PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: montequi ()
Date: April 24, 2011 04:03PM

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> montequi Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> ChyrenB > I'm just saying you are RUSHING TO
> JUDGEMENT to conclude that he is innocent and that
> she was not acting in self-defense.
>
>
> > So ChyrenB believes a person is guilty until
> > proven innocent. Figures. eye rolling smiley
>
>
> RESPONSE: Let's see Monte. I'm saying we don't
> know right now what the hell happened. Therefore
> those who say Nogami is guilty are rushing to
> judgement and those who say she is innocent are
> rushing to judgement and the same is true for the
> guilt or innocence of Brandon Marshall.
>
> So how is it that you conclude that I believe
> either is guilty until proven innocent?
>
> That statement above by me went both ways. As you
> can see by my later long post which was written
> while you were posting this, Montequi.
>
> Wow! That's the first time you've done something
> like this Monte.


You said we're "rushing to judgement" by assuming he's innocent. As far as I know, someone is either innocent or guilty. There's nothing in-between. So, if we can't assume he's innocent, we must assume he's guilty.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 24, 2011 04:15PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Date: April 24, 2011 04:56PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ghotirule ()
Date: April 24, 2011 05:40PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 24, 2011 06:13PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Date: April 24, 2011 08:08PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: dolfanmark ()
Date: April 25, 2011 05:28AM

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
>
> Your forgetting again, people have seen her hit
> and kick him as well. This is not Ms bake an apple
> pie Mom. She has a past as well. And ANYTHING she
> brings up will open that door up on her. I've been
> around the block a few times and to many a
> criminal trial. Its a two way street.winking smiley

Yes, but she was seen punching and kicking him after he grabbed her by her jacket and pinned her up against a wall. He started the physical confontation. And this report was from an off duty police officer who witnessed the incident.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: Mia1 ()
Date: April 25, 2011 06:18AM

smileys with beerMaybe it is was Treasurecoast who witnessed it. lol

Cryn Treasure is right, your just making a case to defend the woman. Your argument is nothing more than your spin on things, slowly watered down by what is and not what could be statements brought in by people who look at the law in a non-judgemental state.

Your a prosecuter, your whole life is all about making somone guilty, twisting the facts like a wrag doll, trying to fit the square piece in the traiangle whole.

Just stop your not winning this case lol thank you.

Yes you bring up some solid points to a what if case if Marshall would be arressted but again please stop thank you. lol

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: Phinsfan2 ()
Date: April 25, 2011 07:46AM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: Aqua&Orange ()
Date: April 25, 2011 07:58AM

Please come, its an emergency. Please come, its an emergency.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 25, 2011 08:45AM

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That guy is an Elite NFL athlete. If he was going
> to attack her nothing short of a gun would stop
> him. She have more then a mark. The Physical
> evidence is CONSISTANT with him being the Victim.
> You can what if all you want , nothing will change

RESPONSE: Now who's speculating on what happened? You guys want to resolve it based on the newspaper facts and what you've heard. You could be right but I'm trying to get you guys to see that you also could have it wrong. You just don't know.


> Again. You are making this claim on a elite NFL
> athlete. Knife is not going to stop him.
> especially when the wound was not even
> significant. She would have a broken wrist from
> him grabbing the knife, or he could have punched
> her and then claimed self defense. But he did not
> touch her. because he was attacked. its
> consistant. is it sinking in yet?

RESPONSE: What if she was sitting on the knife and pulled it out at the last second? What if she had the knife behind her back with one arm and he was so worked up, he wasn't on guard.

You say I'm speculating? I'm just throwing out possibilities. You are the one speculating by saying that because he's a football player, he must have been able to complete any attack that he started. That's just speculation.


> Unfortunately yes. In many cases the victim goes
> on trial and the defedant gets protected. And this
> will never make trial because Brandon will not
> press charges. However the state can still do it
> on his behalf. but most of the time its a plea to
> a much lesser charge like simple battery.

RESPONSE: Yes, the most likely result will be that Brandon will refuse to cooperate. You as a policeman must know to be specific in your language. Although people often refer to is as "press charges" that gives the impression that it is the victim's choice as to whether the matter will be prosecuted. It is not. It is the prosecutor's decision. Now the truth of the matter is that the prosecutor is unlikely to decide to prosecute if the victim announces that he or she will not be a witness for the prosecution. Such an action by the victim makes it virtually impossible for a prosecution to be successful because the chief person involved besides the defendant, the victim, will not be there to support the charge.

I wrote:
> (IF THIS IS TRUE) and the
> > fact that there was no actual physical evidence
> > that he made contact that night before she got
> him
> > first with a knife, does not legally resolve
> the
> > issue.

You replied:
> Sure it does. Because he got stabbed. Thats proof.
> She has none except He said/she said.
> First she needs to prove that it even happened.
> She can not do that. HE CAN.
>
>
RESPONSE: But a defendant does not have to "PROVE" his or her case. He or she is not obligated under the law to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury that he or she is innocent. This is a fallacy most people believe. A defendant only has to 'RAISE A REASONABLE DOUBT' as to his or her guilt. And by the way, I'm glad you brought that up because that explains precisely why the defendant, Nogami, will be able to bring in past instances of domestic violence against her AND AGAINST HIS PRIOR GIRLFRIENDS.


I previously wrote: No, not speculation but just the
> > presentation of a hypothetical. When someone
> > presents a hypothetical they are not saying
> that
> > this is what DID happen, they are saying this
> is
> > what COULD HAVE happened.
> >
TREASURECOAST replied:
> Dude you are all over the place. Where is this
> neighbor? And plenty of people have seen her hit
> and kick him as well.
>
> But none of that will be addmissable in court .
> Only the facts on what happened that night. And
> again,

RESPONSE: I hope the rest of the board is getting the point that you're wrong that the defendant cannot bring up instances of past violence. This is why you're a cop and not a lawyer. A defendant can bring up instances of past violence to show the reasonableness of his reaction.

A guy goes to mass in a Catholic church (I'm not Catholic so I may screw this up), he approaches the altar as to make confession, the priest approaches him with the cup, the guy pulls out a knife and stabs the priest. If the defendant cannot claim any more facts, this guy's claim that he was "in fear" of his safety will not be decided as being reasonable. I'm trying to make an exaggerated example.

But everything on the other side of that is up for proof. No, the victim's past history is not going to be shielded from being introduced if it is RELEVANT (meaning tends to prove, not meaning as you are saying related to the facts of this incident) to show the reasonableness of his actions in light of that past history.

>Its difficuly with domestic violence cases
> becuase 95% of the time , the victim is all pissed
> off the night of the incident , then changes their
> mind the next day. But this is National headline
> news. the SA walks away from this they will get
> hammered. Can't. It will be a Plea for simple
> battery , win /win.

RESPONSE: As far as the plea is concerned, you might be right.

Now, you are talking like you recognize that neither of us KNOW FOR A FACT either what DID HAPPEN or what WILL HAPPEN with the upcoming legal process.

You can say what "will probably happen" or you can say "my money is on this" but you can't say "this is what will definitely happen based on what I've heard the very few facts to be from the media when the story broke."


I wrote:
> > The law does not require that you suffer a
> > physical injury for you to be entitled to use
> > self-defense.
>
You replied:
> But it helps if you can prove it.

RESPONSE: Oh, without a doubt that actual proof helps but it is not REQUIRED. It would be great if she had one of those burglar cams that happened to be operating at the time and it showed him charging at her but people have been succeeding in claiming self-defense for centuries before the invention of those cams.


< You can
> hypothetical it all night , its not going to give
> her any proof.

RESPONSE: She doesn't need "proof." All she has to do is raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury as to whether she was defending herself. You as a cop know that a defendant is not REQUIRED TO PROVE HIS INNOCENCE.


Now that we are on friendly terms and I'd actually
> like to get to know you better I'll just admit it.
> I'm a cop. I guess the difference between you
> and me is I deal in facts , and you guys kinda
> inturpet the law your own way depending on what
> kind of case your trying to make.

RESPONSE: We work the same side of the street but we deal in winning cases before the jury. We not only interpret the law but we have to be aware of all possible interpretations of those "facts" you cops say you deal in.

The facts may look one way out on the street and may look a completely different way once things get in a courtroom where there is a defense attorney trying to spin those facts in his favor. And the best thing defense counsel have going for them is that the defendant's past history is largely shielded (there are some technical exceptions) but the victim's history is "open seaon." And Boy, does Brandon have a lot of open season.

>Your style of
> debate, breaking down each sentence by sentence
> shows the way a lawyer likes to bend things their
> way. (not meant as a knock) I hope my addmission
> as to what I do for a living brings us mutual
> respect and not where we used to be. smileys with beer

RESPONSE: Like I said, we work the same side of the street. The difference is that you think that (assuming Brandon cooperates) this case is winnable and I think, absent the emergence of an eyewitness that is not now being reported), such a prosecution is not even worth the expense of trial given his past history.
> But you have to PROVE they you were in fear. at
> this point she can not.

RESPONSE: Maybe by "proof" you mean convince a jury? If you mean, instead, that she has to bring a witness to say that he was in the process of attacking her, or she has to have that webcam, etc., then that is not the law. She only has to convince the jury that when she says he was in the process of attacking her, she is telling the truth. She doesn't have to bring in hard physical evidence.

So expect to hear Exhibit A: The tape recording PhinsFans2 has clipped below.

Exhibit B: Police reports of prior incidents between the two of them. BTW even reports showing that she attacked him in the past will go to establish the violence relationship between the two and (If I were a defense attorney I would even want that evidence before the jury) certainly is just further proof that there relationship was by nature a violent one thus there is a reasonable likelihood that she is telling the truth when she says he was commencing an attack on her that night.

Exhibit C: His past history of beating prior girlfriends and even cutting them with knives.

Of course, this is all assuming that he cooperates in the prosecution which he probably won't for all kinds of reasons, including wanting it all to "go away" for the sake of the shaky ground he is on with respect to the Commissioner.

> Dude are you serious!? LOL. What if rex ryan set
> this whole thing up to screw with the Dolphins?
> LOL. You gotta give me a break here.

RESPONSE: When I gave the hypothetical about the chained man, it was to make a point that all a defendant has to do in order to claim self-defense is to show that the victim was close enough to assault the defendant that the victim was in "reasonable fear" of his or her safety. I put that in because of your "she had no bruises" song which you sung over and over again to prove she had no right of self-defense.


TreasureCoast wrote:
> Your forgetting again, people have seen her hit
> and kick him as well. This is not Ms bake an apple
> pie Mom. She has a past as well. And ANYTHING she
> brings up will open that door up on her. I've been
> around the block a few times and to many a
> criminal trial. Its a two way street.winking smiley

RESPONSE: Now, here, we are in full agreement both prediction-wise and on the law. You are right. Her bringing up past instances of domestic violence against him does "open the door" (and that is the legal name for the legal concept involved) to evidence against the defendant that is reasonably designed to rebut the fact she is trying to prove (that he attacked her) that he was about to attack her.

But still, if I were a prosecutor, I would want to minimize the introduction of evidence of prior violence between the two, even if it shows that this violence was something that she often instigated.

Like I said, the more instances of violence paraded before the jury, the more likely the jury is to throw up its hands and say, "screw them both."

And when a jury says that, it means an acquittal.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 25, 2011 08:53AM

Mia1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> smileys with beerMaybe it is was Treasurecoast who witnessed
> it. lol
>
> Cryn Treasure is right, your just making a case to
> defend the woman.

RESPONSE: No. Actually I am just arguing "Don't be so sure the woman will be convicted" even if it goes to trial. I am also arguing that those who say "whatever else he has done, he was CLEARLY the victim here" are not NECESSARILY correct. You MAY BE correct in that but there is also a huge possibility that Marshall was not just an innocent victim of a "crazy B."


>Your argument is nothing more
> than your spin on things, slowly watered down by
> what is and not what could be statements brought
> in by people who look at the law in a
> non-judgemental state.

RESPONSE: See when somebody tries to open up possibilities they get accused of taking the opposite position and "spin."

>
> Your a prosecuter, your whole life is all about
> making somone guilty, twisting the facts like a
> rag doll, trying to fit the square piece in the
> triangle whole.

RESPONSE: No, Mia1. We don't try to make someone "look" guilty unless we believe they "are" guilty. LOL. We are not Salem witch hunters.

>
> Just stop your not winning this case lol thank
> you.
>
> Yes you bring up some solid points to a what if
> case if Marshall would be arressted but again
> please stop thank you. lol

RESPONSE: Well, sorry if this is distressing you, Mia1. You know that all I ever want to do is "right by you."

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: berkeley223 ()
Date: April 25, 2011 09:12AM

there are the facts we know and then there are things we don't know about what happened. but based on what we actually know today, the wife is definitely in the wrong and marshall was the victim.
what we know:
(1) he was stabbed
(2) the wife did it
(3) she claims self defense
(4) she made a weird and uncommunicative 911 call
(5) the police investigated and arrested the wife and not marshall. they could have arrested both, just him, or neither.
(6) marshall has a history of domestic issues but has never been convicted of anything

based on the above, what we know supports that marshall is the victim and the wife the perpetrator. to conclude otherwise would be to pile speculation upon speculation. anyone can do that, of course, but to call BM the one who is "in the wrong" takes a lot of guess work; to conclude the wife was in the wrong much less.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: Crowder52 ()
Date: April 25, 2011 09:38AM

I agree CHyren, I do not think she will be convicted, but i also believe he will not be charged or reprimanded by the NFL.
At this point whether, you like it or not, he is technically the victim.
As Berk said anything otherwise is speculation upon speculation, I would have to agree with that.

I do understand, that you are trying to make the case dont, just take a spoon fead story of events from one side or the other, With past events, there is most likely more to the story. But I can speculate as well,

Marshall has a pattern of side tail, Marshall got a hair cut at 4:30 that day based on his last tweet, maybe he got some side tail with his hot hair dresser, His new wife found out about it, and had told him, if he ever cheated on her, she would chop his crotch off, SHe found him cheating through his phone messages from the girl that night, grabbed a kitchen knife, and attempted to fullfill her promise to chop his private parts off, she missed and got him in the stomach, he sliced his hands up trying to protect his manhood. HE is trying to calm her down the whole time because he knows what he has alot on the line, she has remorse for overreacting and going psycho, realizing that she injured him badly. He feels bad for cheating on her and causing her so much pain, so he feels partially responsible. The injury is so bad, she doesnt want him to die, she calls 911, trying to save him. He tells her dont worry, I will tell everybody i fell on a broken vase.
THey try and tell the story to the cops, they dont believe her, attempt to scare her, put the cuffs on, isolate her. Tell her he might die, maximize the severity of what she did, her initial response is to break, and claim self defense.

He will obviously, refuse to testify, depending on how strong the SA believe the case against her to be without Marshall's testimony. WOuld he testify in defense of his wife and say it was an accident, or he slipped in fell on vase, create doubt and a weak case for the States Attorney.

You lawyers can answer this better then me, will the DA let her walk away, if Marshall, doesnt want to testify. Or will they try and lower the charges and get her to plea.
I think Marhall and his wife will want it to go away, the question is, will the States attorney office pursue the case, being that it is so public and be a black eye on the office for looking like on the surface, showing favoritism to a celebrity or a star athlete.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: berkeley223 ()
Date: April 25, 2011 09:43AM

if he refuses to testify, they basically have no case and won't prosecute---is that right, Chyren?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: brandon marshall stabbed!
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: April 25, 2011 10:35AM

Yeah, berk. And Crowder's story gives an insight on how the dispute arose and what it was all about.

Before that, we knew absolutely nothing except those facts. He got stabbed. There were no scratches on her. He tried to claim accident. She admitted it but said self-defense.

The whole story about an argument about him cheating I am just hearing for the first time.

Given that being the case, particularly if she admitted it to the prosecution, she would be considered the only one eligible for arrest because jealousy is not grounds for stabbing someone.

Again, however, it is easier to prosecute a case of murder without a victim than it is to prosecute an assault case with a live but unwilling victim.

But if I had heard that tweet about the incident involving jealousy, I would never have raised the possible defense.

But neither did the ones saying that Marshall was nothing but a victim know that the incident involved her being jealous.

All along my point is that we didn't know the facts.

Yes, berk, in answer to your earlier post, given the facts we knew, she was properly arrested and he was properly not arrested. The cops had a clear basis to arrest her and it is not their job to believe she acted in self-defense, even if she claimed it. If they did that, nobody would ever be arrested because no matter what the crime, they would always claim a legal, if not factual, defense at the scene. TreasureCoast must have seen this happen a million times.

However, to allow the possibility of self-defense is not to "conclude" that he was the bad guy and she was the good guy. I just said that these facts, while supporting the propriety of arresting HER, did not necessarily lead to the conclusion that she was not acting in self-defense.

Options: ReplyQuote
Pages: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 3 of 4


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     
   
Home Curt Fennell
Contact Us
DOLFAN in New England
TOP
   
© Phins.com. No portion of this site may be reproduced without
the express permission of the author, Curt Fennell. All rights reserved.