The official ‘Tory Lanez vs Megan Thee Stallion’ trial thread.

[Dynamite James]

First she didn’t say ALL of it was false. She said some of it was, but most of it she claimed she couldn’t remember or didn’t want to talk about. She even confirmed some of it as true in court.

Furthermore “lies” can be evidence. Which is why the defense tried to use the recording to their advantage as well. It just backfired on them.

Do you work for Megan the stallion and her team? You’re Doing to much

 

[WSFGDan]

 

[Dynamite James]

Why would she be able to recall all the lyrics to the song on the spot?

Why does that mean the prosecution is doing a horrible job because she couldn’t?

In this case the “witness” didn’t matter. We can all see the lyrics. Whole point was to get the lyrics talked about in court. Which they were.

 

[WSFGDan]

 

[AtlienInTheGoodieMob]

I'm confused on the ongoing jury problem they're having. Isn't this like the third issue? The first person needed to be replaced. The second was drunk? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Wait wait wait

A juror showed up drunk???

nikka what?


Lee Dainels couldnt write a better script

 

[WSFGDan]

The prosecution took hella L’s in the morning using that Rap song and the defense was able to bring up Rocnation threatening Kelsey and dismantle the DA’s witnesses as liars

 

[WSFGDan]

Wait wait wait

A juror showed up drunk???

nikka what?


Lee Dainels couldnt write a better script

Yeah they said one keeps coughing like he has covid and making noise, one rode the elevator with Tory like twice and one showed up drunk.

 

[Dynamite James]

The prosecution took hella L’s in the morning using that Rap song and the defense was able to bring up Rocnation threatening Kelsey and dismantle the DA’s witnesses as liars

Impossible!!!!! “how!” “Why!” “What!” Y’all just hate black women!!! @MeachTheMonster

 

[HARLEM AL]

Lyrics are permitted in court depending on the case, jurisdiction

If I'm not mistaken the defense introduced the lyrics into evidence in the first place I'm assuming as a means to incriminate Kelsey

So the judge allowed lyrics

Funny they do more to incriminate Tory

They actually don’t.

 

[PharaohAtem]

Impossible!!!!! “how!” “Why!” “What!” Y’all just hate black women!!! @MeachTheMonster

Meg was still shot tho

 

[WSFGDan]

 

[MeachTheMonster]

She was brought up as a witness for the song. She should be able to know the song front and back. You cant only remember the parts that is beneficial for the prosecutor.

Also Lyrics arent permitted in court. How the fukk the judge allow that is beyond me. I guess he throwing the prosecution a bone.

Even then, Its still a bad witness... shyt is causing even more doubt in the case.

I think a lot of the counfusion is that you guys aren’t really familiar with the flow of how things work in court.

The song and it’s lyrics were already in evidence. The Writer and performer of the song already confirmed she wrote and performed the song.

A witness was not needed to attest to the lyrics of the song because the jury already had the lyrics to read themselves.

The defense brought up the lyrics during their interview with Kelsey, therefore the prosecution had a chance to reply.

The way things work in court is that the prosecution can’t just randomly play the lyrics during the hearing unless they have a reason I.E. a “witness”.

The credibility of this “witness” is of no significance because again we all already have the lyrics. The witness being unable to recall all the lyrics doesn’t bring any doubt to what the lyrics are. The “witness” was just used for a chance to say the lyrics out loud in court.

 

[WSFGDan]

I think a lot of the counfusion is that you guys aren’t really familiar with the flow of how things work in court.

The song and it’s lyrics were already in evidence. The Writer and performer of the song already confirmed she wrote and performed the song.

A witness was not needed to attest to the lyrics of the song because the jury already had the lyrics to read themselves.

The defense brought up the lyrics during their interview with Kelsey, therefore the prosecution had a chance to reply.

The way things work in court is that the prosecution can’t just randomly play the lyrics during the hearing unless they have a reason I.E. a “witness”.

The credibility of this “witness” is of no significance because again we all already have the lyrics. The witness being unable to recall all the lyrics doesn’t bring any doubt to what the lyrics are. The “witness” was just used for a chance to say the lyrics out loud in court.

Are you slow or being purposefully stupid?

The jury decides this case and they’ll see that as suspect creating reasonable doubt for Tory if everyone one of the prosecutions witnesses are lying to some extent. It absolutely matters.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Are you slow or being purposefully stupid?

The jury decides this case and they’ll see that as suspect creating reasonable doubt for Tory if everyone one of the prosecutions witnesses are lying to some extent. It absolutely matters.

The witness isn’t “lying” because they don’t remember every lyric to the song.

The witness was just there as a reason for the prosecutors to talk about the lyrics.

It’s like if they called a witness to confirm the Sky is blue then the defense asks them what color is grass and they say “i’m not prepared to answer that question”

That doesn’t now mean the witness is a liar and the sky isn’t blue.

 

[GhostoftheMan]

That’s cause that dude is promoting that shyt like a youtube Chanel and injecting all of his own opinion in it

“WHATS UPGUYS ITS YOUR BOY HUGE UPDATE”

He’s trying to sell $4.00 videos so he makes it his business to fan the flames of controversy, but in this point he was wrong. The person that wrote those lyrics already testified in court they wrote the song. The song was already permitted to evidence. It is then not a “shame” that both the defense and prosecution was able to further talk about the song. “lawyerfirworkers” made it seem like the song was just pulled off the internet and played in court devoid of kelsey confirming it’s her and the song already being in evidence. Furthermore this was only allowed because the defense tried to use the lyrics to their advantage so the prosecution was allowed to respond.

So who’s Bias again???

Tryin to do what them johnny depp law youtubers did pretty much