I feel bad when I watch Dateline and you KNOW the person is innocent and jail and no one is helping him/her.
Carroo's lawyer says Leonte didn't touch victim (Video Link Included)
- Thread starter THERAC
- Start date
I feel bad when I watch Dateline and you KNOW the person is innocent and jail and no one is helping him/her.
That's comparing apples to oranges.
The school is going to get absolutely hammered if they do. I'm not saying it's right, but you KNOW the media around here.
I think the point is, Carroo should have worn a Richard Nixon mask before leaving the Hale Center.
The biggest immature name caller on the board chastising someone for calling someone names.....funniest post ever.
No way. Hearing on October 1. If the video evidence is everything that Carroo's lawyer says it is, then they walk out of that hearing with the charges dropped.
If that doesn't happen then one of the other things we know about this case is that Carroo's lawyer is a blowhard douchebag.
Maybe the school should grow a set and do what is right and what they perceive will hurt their reputation the most. See Gary Patterson's statement, which I think is a bad statement comparing assault, battery and robbery with rape. But he at least pointed out the accused was otherwise a model citizen.
Ah...gotcha. My trial knowledge is what I see on TV shows. Haha.
So, the hearing evidence will be presented? If the judge thinks it could go on, then a trial date is set?
I agree...but this is Rutgers.
It lost its set when Mulcahy got tossed under the bus.
In fairness to "that prick RU4Real", he doesn't call people names 100% of the time. 90% maybe....maybe. lol
It will lose a lot more than a set if they did that. Duke lacrosse case anyone? They settled for millions.
Just to recap what the judges, jurors and executioners on this board believed.
1. Caroo is guilty because, at 215 pounds he picked up a 105 pound girl and slammed her into the concrete. Even though slamming someone into concrete would cause very serious injuries..
2. The story changed and Caroo only picked up and placed a 105 pound on the concrete causing some injuries. He is still guilty, even without the facts being known.
3. Video surfaces that show Caroo picking up his current girlfriend and taking her away from the scene. They don't believe it........., why the delay in releasing it, the video was doctored and if he was innocent why were the charges not dropped.
4. Judges, jurors and executioners now believe Caroo has a fall guy.
1. Caroo is guilty because, at 215 pounds he picked up a 105 pound girl and slammed her into the concrete. Even though slamming someone into concrete would cause very serious injuries..
2. The story changed and Caroo only picked up and placed a 105 pound on the concrete causing some injuries. He is still guilty, even without the facts being known.
3. Video surfaces that show Caroo picking up his current girlfriend and taking her away from the scene. They don't believe it........., why the delay in releasing it, the video was doctored and if he was innocent why were the charges not dropped.
4. Judges, jurors and executioners now believe Caroo has a fall guy.
But did the FBI release a copy of the tape as proof the JFK was not killed that day? Nice try
"She also denied that it was Turner who dropped her on the concrete. 'I know Shane. I know the difference in size. Shane could not have picked me up and thrown me like he did'.”
How come only one news outlet included this quote. Read it a couple of times. She didn't say "it wasn't Shane because I clearly saw Carroo do this to me." Her allegation is based on the size of her "attacker." Pretty weak sauce. Of all the quotes and allegations in this mess,this is to me, the most interesting.
www.northjersey.com/news/attorney-says-he-has-video-eyewitness-exonerating-rutgers-football-star-1.1416131
How come only one news outlet included this quote. Read it a couple of times. She didn't say "it wasn't Shane because I clearly saw Carroo do this to me." Her allegation is based on the size of her "attacker." Pretty weak sauce. Of all the quotes and allegations in this mess,this is to me, the most interesting.
www.northjersey.com/news/attorney-says-he-has-video-eyewitness-exonerating-rutgers-football-star-1.1416131
Last edited:
I never understood that. How? It's a privilege, not a right? Can't a backup sue then for not playing?
Hey Knight Shift (shhhh!!!) - you know Hud is kind of old and I don't think he can see this small font, so here's what you can do. While you may have stumbled with your misuse of "corroborate," you can zing him back with his misuse of "infer." He should have used "imply" not "infer" at the end of his last sentence.
Uhm, doesn't that describe about 98% of all lawyers, Knight-Shift not included, he is one of the good ones. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
Thanks for the tip. I like to play it straight up and not trap people in their own miscues. I feel like I am in the middle of a trial here.
I can't believe so much energy has been invested on a video that likely shows maybe 25% of the altercation. Basically it's useless for either camp, which is why I would've thought this would be a 5-10 post thread. Guess I failed Message Board Psychology 101...
I just got a tip....the prosecutors are preparing perjury charges against the alleged victim....true or false?
I didn't see that quote. But I agree, that if her claim isn't based on her (or another witness) actually seeing LC do this, it is pretty weak to claim it was him based solely on being a big guy.
If there are edited and unedited versions, both sides have reviewed or will review the full video. The defense releases edited version because they know the unedited version proves innocence. The prosecutors have to be careful and review the unedited version over and over to make sure.
The defense does not release an edited version if there is any chance that the unedited version shows Caroo was guilty of "slamming the victim into the concrete".
Last edited:
Yes, of course, but I think he's nearing the age where many people start to need reading glasses (I was about 40 when that happened and I had had 20-15 vision for years), which I thought some might find humorous. Anything to avoid having to read more silly pronouncements based off that very incomplete video...
Apparently the 2 videos were taken some minutes apart. We have no idea if the videos span the time where the alleged "body slam" occurred.
The second video allegedly shows the "victim" swinging a purse at the new GF. And it supposedly shows Caroo grabbing the new GF and pulling her way to protect her.
If that lawyer's description of the video is sound, and there are no competing videos or it is shown that this video has not been selectively edited... well, lets say I hope Caroo has been going to class and staying eligible and hope to see him back soon... or at least be cleared before he starts training for the combines.
The second video allegedly shows the "victim" swinging a purse at the new GF. And it supposedly shows Caroo grabbing the new GF and pulling her way to protect her.
If that lawyer's description of the video is sound, and there are no competing videos or it is shown that this video has not been selectively edited... well, lets say I hope Caroo has been going to class and staying eligible and hope to see him back soon... or at least be cleared before he starts training for the combines.
Yeah I don't like that she's just blaming the big strong guy because she thinks the smaller guy couldn't have done it. Sounds like she never saw who did whatever to her & her story is falling apart.
Actually, f@ck stick, I meant infer...
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infer
See, infer ties back to corroborate.
4. to hint, IMPLY, SUGGEST
so, you can take your witty sarcasm and go craft us a 50,000 word weather forecast. Or you can just copy and paste this "it's going to snow tomorrow and I will be wildly wrong as to the amounts."
Or, you can swing by the Gadesen Flag in the front row of the Blue Lot on Saturday and we can chat about all of it in person? Whaddya say?
I've never seen him wear reading glasses.
As far as I know, he still knows which wires go into the block of C4, which is a good reason to keep him around. Especially since my wife swears I'm color blind.
I think the most important fact I got out of those two videos is that there appears to be a security officer or police officer trying to break up the incident in the first video. That raises a whole lot of questions and/or may provide a number of answers.
I doubt it's useless. It depends on what the witnesses said before the video appeared. For instance, if the woman who's pressing charges says that she was attacked and didn't hit anyone, her credibility takes a big hit if the video shows her running toward Carroo's girlfriend and later hitting her with her hand bag. In a battle of witness accounts, credibility is a big deal. Also, if that mess of a video actually shows Carroo pulling his own girlfriend out of the fracas and not attacking the woman, and that supports the story he's been telling, it helps. Finally, if the video does show someone else touching her and her ending up on the ground, that helps Carroo too.
Yes, it matters that the video could only be a portion of the altercation. And the victim can make that argument. She certainly can argue that much, much more happened that isn't on the video. But, on the other hand, if the part that is on the video conflicts with her story and at least presents some evidence seemingly consistent with Carroo's story, it'll help Carroo.
Of course, if the prosecutor or court finds the video to be an indiscernible mess, like I did, it won't matter and possibly won't be used.
