The MoBro's Show

[RunDogGun]

Well there is a shocker, huh? Not enough evidence for a trial? Conflicting witness' accounts and no one can place the Morri where the victim claims to be beaten? Who didn't see this coming?

Regardless of whether the Morri are bad people, this case was weak from the start. The prosecution overreached with a complete lack of evidence. I think I said that from the start of this whole thing.

[RunDogGun]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/paulcoro/status/628237703763472384[/tweet]
The motion that Coro is referring to is a motion to remand to the grand jury for a new finding of probable cause. I haven't read the motion. I've only reviewed the docket sheet, which references the motion by name. These types of motions generally allege some sort of defect in the grand jury proceedings that undermines the grand jury's basis for finding probable cause. The grand jury is responsible for determining whether the state has a sufficient evidentiary basis to proceed with charges against the defendants. If this motion were granted, it would be a major victory for the Morrii and would probably push the timeline back significantly. I believe the prosecutor would have to once again convince a grand jury that there was sufficient evidence to issue an indictment against the Morrii. It would essentially hit reset on the proceedings to date. It's understandable that the judge would want to take sufficient time to fully consider the motion.

Thanks!

[bigfoot]

I think a done deal is waiting on an acquittal/court.

I like that theory.

So much for that theory.

Most legal minds (Babby?) probably saw something like this coming or at least not surprised. This whole incident has been muddled with sketchy info, lack of or reluctant witnesses, denial, flat out lies, shady characters, including momma,.... and 5 guys fleeing in a phantom .

Seems like it could be drawn out for sometime. The State's case seemed flimsy from the beginning. society can be quick to judge, and things can appear quite clear... but in a court room, different deal.(see OJ) If evidence is suppressed, omitted, turned in late, monkeyed with, it can jeopardize the whole case. The letter of the law can be quite confusing to read but must be followed.

There.....my summary based on several yrs of Perry Mason, Law and Order, and multiple viewings of My Cuz Vinny

I wonder if those ILWT 'room mate' witnesses have been subpoenaed.

Regardless of personal opinions of these mini thugs (see, mine slipped in), an acquittal is the best thing for the organization.

Stay tuned Suns fans...

Wait a sec ... I didn't think a Grand Jury was a place to present all the evidence. Isn't it a meeting between the prosecutor and 12 people to decide if there is sufficient evidence to proceed with a real trial. No judge and no defense attorney are present and only 3/4 of the 12 need to agree to proceed with a trial. Is it a big deal if the prosecutor didn't present a witness who says they saw the Morri 100 yards away but presented 25 who said they saw them at the fight? Is that "withholding vital information to the case". I'd say no way. The defense lawyer can present this single witness at the real trial. My guess is the witness is a Morri buddy or took some cash under the table.

So at least 9 out of 12 grand jurors felt there was enough evidence to warrant a trial and this latest motion is just a ploy by the Morii's lawyer to drag things out. These guys are still going down and I hope the f*ck the prosecutor doesn't even offer a plea bargain.

[plonden]

Wait a sec ... I didn't think a Grand Jury was a place to present all the evidence. Isn't it a meeting between the prosecutor and 12 people to decide if there is sufficient evidence to proceed with a real trial. No judge and no defense attorney are present and only 3/4 of the 12 need to agree to proceed with a trial. Is it a big deal if the prosecutor didn't present a witness who says they saw the Morri 100 yards away but presented 25 who said they saw them at the fight? Is that "withholding vital information to the case". I'd say no way. The defense lawyer can present this single witness at the real trial. My guess is the witness is a Morri buddy or took some cash under the table.

It actually does matter. A lot. The twins are being charged with assault. Not conspiracy to commit assault. As part of its case in chief at trial, the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Morrii assaulted the victim. Not that they convinced one of their buddies to do it--that is conspiracy. Being at the fight is not assault. Being in the fight is assault. According to Coro's article, the defense motion states that no witness can put the twins within 15-20 feet of the fight. If that is true, that is material information that the grand jury should have been made aware of before deciding whether there is sufficient evidence to charge the Morrii with assault charges. Big difference, and could mean the difference between an indictment and no indictment.

[Flying Colors]

The longer this goes on, the more i feel like the charges will just get dropped or the Twins get off in some other fashion

[bigfoot]

Wait a sec ... I didn't think a Grand Jury was a place to present all the evidence. Isn't it a meeting between the prosecutor and 12 people to decide if there is sufficient evidence to proceed with a real trial. No judge and no defense attorney are present and only 3/4 of the 12 need to agree to proceed with a trial. Is it a big deal if the prosecutor didn't present a witness who says they saw the Morri 100 yards away but presented 25 who said they saw them at the fight? Is that "withholding vital information to the case". I'd say no way. The defense lawyer can present this single witness at the real trial. My guess is the witness is a Morri buddy or took some cash under the table.

It actually does matter. A lot. The twins are being charged with assault. Not conspiracy to commit assault. As part of its case in chief at trial, the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Morrii assaulted the victim. Not that they convinced one of their buddies to do it--that is conspiracy. Being at the fight is not assault. Being in the fight is assault. According to Coro's article, the defense motion states that no witness can put the twins within 15-20 feet of the fight. If that is true, that is material information that the grand jury should have been made aware of before deciding whether there is sufficient evidence to charge the Morrii with assault charges. Big difference, and could mean the difference between an indictment and no indictment.

I would have assumed that the grand jury would have received testimony from multiple witnesses about the fight. Those jurors would have heard from the witnesses the twins were not within 15' of the fight. It's hard to believe that 12 reasonable people would vote to send the Morri to trial for assault if they didn't have some information that they participated in the fight. And in fact the defense motion is wrong because the assailant testified that the Morri attacked him. Therefore at least one person saw them within 15'.

[plonden]

I would have assumed that the grand jury would have received testimony from multiple witnesses about the fight. Those jurors would have heard from the witnesses the twins were not within 15' of the fight. It's hard to believe that 12 reasonable people would vote to send the Morri to trial for assault if they didn't have some information that they participated in the fight. And in fact the defense motion is wrong because the assailant testified that the Morri attacked him. Therefore at least one person saw them within 15'.

I recall the Coro article saying that the prosecutor failed to present evidence that the victim changed his story about whether the Morrii were actually involved in the beating. That's certainly relevant information that the grand jury should be permitted to consider if it is relying solely on his testimony to indict the Morrii for assault. I'd like to have as much faith in the grand jury's indictment as you do. But in reality the prosecutor holds immense sway over the grand jury in terms of whether the grand jury will choose to indict. A judge famously said that a prosecutor could convince a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich. This is largely a result of the grand jury system--it is not adversarial, there is no cross-examination, and the defense cannot present evidence. I have much more faith in a jury's verdict after an adversarial trial process, although it is by no means perfect.

[RaisingArizona]

Well, well, well... Plenty of crow to go around.

[RunDogGun]

I would have assumed that the grand jury would have received testimony from multiple witnesses about the fight. Those jurors would have heard from the witnesses the twins were not within 15' of the fight. It's hard to believe that 12 reasonable people would vote to send the Morri to trial for assault if they didn't have some information that they participated in the fight. And in fact the defense motion is wrong because the assailant testified that the Morri attacked him. Therefore at least one person saw them within 15'.

I recall the Coro article saying that the prosecutor failed to present evidence that the victim changed his story about whether the Morrii were actually involved in the beating. That's certainly relevant information that the grand jury should be permitted to consider if it is relying solely on his testimony to indict the Morrii for assault. I'd like to have as much faith in the grand jury's indictment as you do. But in reality the prosecutor holds immense sway over the grand jury in terms of whether the grand jury will choose to indict. A judge famously said that a prosecutor could convince a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich. This is largely a result of the grand jury system--it is not adversarial, there is no cross-examination, and the defense cannot present evidence. I have much more faith in a jury's verdict after an adversarial trial process, although it is by no means perfect.

I don't think changed his accusation of the Morrii beating him, he changed his story of where he was when the beating occurred. This change left no other witness seeing either Morrii in that spot.

[bigfoot]

Well, well, well... Plenty of crow to go around.

Not for me ... where there is smoke there is fire. These guys were involved at some level. Either straight up assault or conspiracy to commit assault. They were seen leaving the scene of the crime with three of the other accused. The lied to the police saying they didn't know the assailant. Crow will be eaten after they are sentenced.

[RunDogGun]

Well, well, well... Plenty of crow to go around.

Not for me ... where there is smoke there is fire. These guys were involved at some level. Either straight up assault or conspiracy to commit assault. They were seen leaving the scene of the crime with three of the other accused. The lied to the police saying they didn't know the assailant. Crow will be eaten after they are sentenced.

Or Hood lied about how well he knew the twins and him being a financial supporter and mentor? Meeting someone a few times over seven years, while maybe meeting thousands over that same time, saying you don't know someone isn't a lie. I only heard Marcus say he had heard his name, but he didn't know him, which no one can say he is not telling it the way he sees it.

I've waited on many famous people, some a few times, I wouldn't say I know any of them. Yes it's a bit of semantics, but I still haven't seen these pictures that prove Hood did anything for the twins.

In the end, they were stupid to put themselves in this situation, but other than that we really don't know much more.

[saintEscaton]

Well, well, well... Plenty of crow to go around.

And you were saying?

[Moochthemonkey]

Well, well, well... Plenty of crow to go around.

And you were saying?

talk about owned

[oddity]

Apparently we have an answer about Markieff's willingness to play for us. https://twitter.com/BurnsAndGambo/status/629413143198978048

[RaisingArizona]

Huh lol. What does him being bitter about his brother being salary cap dumped have to do with this case?