Wack100: Tory Lanez’s lawyer has video proof that Tory didn’t shoot Megan Thee Stallion.

[Organic Trees]

A nikka got locked up cause he wouldn’t open his mouth and be labeled a snitch. He stupid asf for that. But the state not allowing this in court is foul due to wanting a speedy trial is foul

 

[EndDomination]

YOU DO REALIZE TORY
COULD HAVE TAKEN THE STAND
AND TOLD THE WORLD
WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED RIGHT?

THATS USUALLY WHAT
INNOCENT PPL DO WHEN FACING
A DECADE IN JAIL.






​

 

[EndDomination]

Yes, and no. you can be innocent, testify and still lose. all your criminal past if it exists is up for scrutiny If you're on the stand. sometimes, shyt most of the time it's best if you stay in the defendant's chair and let your lawyer do his/her job.

That is possible - but if he had good testimony, he should have testified. There are limitations on what prior crimes can be introduced in a hearing: typically it is just crimes of dishonesty, and even then the test is whether it is more probative and prejudicial and largely just for the purposes of impeachment (kind of jumbling that up but I'm typing this from my phone on an elevator).

Having the Defendant sit out, and also sitting on exculpatory evidence is insane.

No... That is not what happens.
Every time this case gets brought up I keep having to explain it isn't wise to take the stand as a defendent.

This has been the thought process in law for as long as I can remember.

It is the States job to prove you guilty. You are an innocent person sitting in the courtroom.

Tory was going to jail regardless, simply because people, including the jury, believed Meg on her word .
Nothing Tory would have said would have made a bit of difference and the prosecution would have made him look worse. That's their job. They are good at it.
Lack of sufficient evidence and conflicting testimonies should have been enough to send that black man home

It is *usually* a good idea to have the defendant sit out.

Tory was going to jail because he did what he was accused of, and couldn't provide a plausible alternative interpretation of events.

 

[EndDomination]

I'm confused...

The pro Megan people seem to be saying, "we don't care if there's evidence proving Tory didn't shoot Megan. Leave him in jail for being stupid".

Is this what you guys saying?

You don't seem to be reading.

A lot of the posters are saying, "there is no exculpatory evidence, and the only people saying that there is are pathological liars and attention-seekers."

 

[EndDomination]

A nikka got locked up cause he wouldn’t open his mouth and be labeled a snitch. He stupid asf for that. But the state not allowing this in court is foul due to wanting a speedy trial is foul

The state did not stop this information from being included in the trial.

 

[mag357]

It is *usually* a good idea to have the defendant sit out.

Tory was going to jail because he did what he was accused of, and couldn't provide a plausible alternative interpretation of events.

The defense doesn't have to make a plausible interpretation of event's tho brother.
This is why it is "usually" a good idea for the defendent to sit out.

The prosecution is suppose to have a challenging uphill battle to prove their case, beyond a reasonable doubt.

You had witnesses needing immunity and changing their story on the stand.
And Your "victim" isn't credible.

But like I've seen time and time again the judicial system is a joke.