Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/9/25 at 6:49 pm to TideSaint
Yeah but they can’t charge Johnson now because they royally fricked up and gave him immunity.
I still think Darius gets off because of Asia Humphreys testimony but if he is offered a plea deal…I would consider it after this verdict
I still think Darius gets off because of Asia Humphreys testimony but if he is offered a plea deal…I would consider it after this verdict
Posted on 5/9/25 at 6:52 pm to mistaken4193
quote:
Yeah but they can’t charge Johnson now because they royally fricked up and gave him immunity
He’ll be in for some other stupid shite within a year.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 7:35 pm to mistaken4193
quote:
if he is offered a plea deal…I would consider it after this verdict
Which is why the prosecution wanted this one first. They know they have no case against Darius.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 7:44 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
The defense is going to appeal the decision not to allow the evidence surrounding the felony amounts of marijuana found in the Jeep that no one was charged with possessing. Hard to imagine that not being relevant.
It’s easy to imagine it’s not relevant because it isn’t relevant.
The case isn’t about whether or not the girl’s boyfriend was a good guy. It’s about whether or not she got murdered by the defendant.
Unless there was an allegation of a drug deal being involved, the fact he had drugs has no bearing on that question. He could’ve had 30 kg of fine Colombian in the trunk and it wouldn’t be relevant to this particular case.
If that’s going to be their grounds for appeal they are wasting everyone’s time and money.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 7:49 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
Which is why the prosecution wanted this one first. They know they have no case against Darius.
Geez, really?
They tried this guy first because he is the shooter. Simple as that.
Miles’ attorney is on the phone right now with the DA trying for any deal that will get a sentence other than life without - and if they offer one, Miles will take it.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 8:17 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
Geez, really?
Yes, really. This case was flimsy, and the case against Miles is nonexistent.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 8:18 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
It’s easy to imagine it’s not relevant because it isn’t relevant.
The case isn’t about whether or not the girl’s boyfriend was a good guy. It’s about whether or not she got murdered by the defendant.
It's relevant.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 8:26 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
It's relevant.
No, it isn’t. Not one bit. The only reason it would be introduced would be as an attempt to taint the jury. It’s the same reason prosecutors have limits on their ability to introduce a defendant’s prior criminal acts.
There’s only a couple centuries of case law on issues like these.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 8:28 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
This case was flimsy
Out of curiosity, have you ever attended a murder trial or for that matter any felony criminal trial?
This jury voted to convict in an hour.
It sometimes takes them longer than that to select a foreman. They walked into that room unanimous in the opinion that he was guilty required little if any deliberation.
That’s not how a flimsy case goes, that’s what happens when it’s a slam dunk case.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 8:29 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
No, it isn’t. Not one bit
Yes, completely. It shows that they weren't at the scene just to have a good time in Tudcaloosa, which means they lied under oath.
Also shows that they were, for some reason, given an extremely sweet deal for testifying.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 8:30 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
It sometimes takes them longer than that to select a foreman. They walked into that room unanimous in the opinion that he was guilty required little if any deliberation.
That’s not how a flimsy case goes, that’s what happens when it’s a slam dunk case.
In other words, you haven't paid attention to the case at all.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 8:47 pm to imjustafatkid
A jury of 12 people, the composition of which was agreed to by the defense and prosecution, heard several days of evidence including testimony by the defendant himself and convicted in an hour.
Again I ask, have you ever attended a serious criminal trial? In my former job, the very first one I testified in was a capital murder trial. There were quite a few more as either a witness or helping with the trial presentation over the next 17 years.
When a jury comes back that fast, they considered the case a very easy one and it can go either way. I was once part of a case that we felt pretty good about and then the defendant got acquitted just about as quickly as this guy got convicted.
He’ll lose any appeal based on the presence of ANY amount of drugs and Miles will almost certainly take a plea deal (assuming one is offered, the DA might just decide to roll with the cap murder). I don’t expect you to believe me, but prepare yourself for disappointment.
Again I ask, have you ever attended a serious criminal trial? In my former job, the very first one I testified in was a capital murder trial. There were quite a few more as either a witness or helping with the trial presentation over the next 17 years.
When a jury comes back that fast, they considered the case a very easy one and it can go either way. I was once part of a case that we felt pretty good about and then the defendant got acquitted just about as quickly as this guy got convicted.
He’ll lose any appeal based on the presence of ANY amount of drugs and Miles will almost certainly take a plea deal (assuming one is offered, the DA might just decide to roll with the cap murder). I don’t expect you to believe me, but prepare yourself for disappointment.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 11:26 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
When a jury comes back that fast, they considered the case a very easy one and it can go either way. I was once part of a case that we felt pretty good about and then the defendant got acquitted just about as quickly as this guy got convicted.
That's nice. They're wrong.
Posted on 5/10/25 at 6:12 am to imjustafatkid
Since you’re obviously a witness, why didn’t the defense subpoena you to testify?
Posted on 5/10/25 at 7:40 am to JustGetItRight
quote:
Miles’ attorney is on the phone right now with the DA trying for any deal that will get a sentence other than life without - and if they offer one, Miles will take it.
No way. They will be looking at 20 years and negotiating from there.
Posted on 5/10/25 at 8:34 am to SECSolomonGrundy
If Johnson would have killed Davis and Harris is still alive, would they have charged Harris with murder like they have Miles for giving Johnson the gun?
Posted on 5/10/25 at 10:48 am to Syd
quote:
If Johnson would have killed Davis and Harris is still alive, would they have charged Harris with murder like they have Miles for giving Johnson the gun?
My suspicion is yes.
Miles is going to need to plead for something less than life without possibility of parole. Miles provided his weapon to a person who committed a murder with said weapon. Davis being convicted on the capital murder charge is the final nail in the coffin for Miles getting off with time served or less. If he serves 10 years, that's probably a win for his defense team.
Posted on 5/10/25 at 11:08 am to JustGetItRight
quote:
Since you’re obviously a witness, why didn’t the defense subpoena you to testify?
The defense called Davis, and a Jeep expert who explained why Johnson's testimony that he "accidentally" cut the lights on the Jeep while searching for Davis was most likely perjury because the humongous hazard light button is on the opposite side of the steering wheel from the headlights. He was obviously hunting these guys and was acting like someone looking to perform a drive by shooting.
This post was edited on 5/10/25 at 11:09 am
Posted on 5/10/25 at 12:18 pm to imjustafatkid
The defendant testified he “had to get him before he got me” with video showing him what could easily be described as lying in wait and then approaching the jeep from a concealed position.
The second he spoke those words coupled with his actions shown on video, he was a convicted man.
If he has any appeal possible, it’s going to be an ineffective counsel argument for the dumbass that put him on the stand to make that statement.
The second he spoke those words coupled with his actions shown on video, he was a convicted man.
If he has any appeal possible, it’s going to be an ineffective counsel argument for the dumbass that put him on the stand to make that statement.
Page 2 of 4
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News