McCollough indicted

[sjt18]

Is McCollough practicing?

I believe some of the reports have mentioned him being a leader in the secondary and on the D. He appears to be practicing. It appears he is expected to play.

 

[TAF]

Is McCollough practicing?

Yes

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Dammit. We don't need this kind of ****

 

[BlinghamptonVol]

I believe some of the reports have mentioned him being a leader in the secondary and on the D. He appears to be practicing. It appears he is expected to play.

Yes

Thank you for your quick responses. And it's good news!

 

[BruisedOrange]

\
Stories like yours are so scary.
I am incredibly happy it didn't ruin your life. I think stewing in a jail when I did nothing wrong would drive me insane. Literally. It must have been challenging to move on and let it go later.

It really bothers me how many inmates are proven innocent by the various Innocence Projects who were convicted due to prosecutorial misconduct or lack of effort by DA's.
And the kicker is even with a preponderance of evidence, it takes a decade or longer to get those people released. Appellate courts usually refuse release. And prosecutors argue they should remain in prison for reasons other than being guilty. Innocence Project work suggests @5% of inmates are innocent; far too many. The main cause is eyewitness error.

I served on a jury for two drug cases, and only one other juror and myself even cared whether they actually did it or not. The statement, "If they didn't do this, they've done a lot of other things they got away with, so I say guilty" was thrown around multiple times in the jury room by multiple jurors. I was very disappointed by the evidence the police offered. We didn't even get as much as a photo of the drugs, just a written report and the detective's personal testimony.

This is a very overlooked fact. Juries are in a lot of cases popularity contests. It's really about how they view the involved parties and their lawyers. Things as simple as the wrong haircut, a butthole lawyer, not looking innocent enough. Those can all the difference. Most juries are sadly our peers...sounds good till you realize that 90% of people are not that smart. Tank is in a good situation as he's a pretty clean-cut guy, will likely have a decent lawyer and unless some miraculous evidence thats not been put out there comes up, the case against him is VERY weak.

This book sheds lots of light on why so many "scary stories" exist--in courtrooms, police departments, inside the CIA, and certainly behind the headlines. It may shake you up, but I'd recommend anyone read it before serving jury duty.

My most recent jury duty was serving grand jury in Chattanooga. I came away from a rewarding experience realizing that, it's not that people are dumb or prejudiced or lack critical thinking skills... it's that some (maybe all of us) are capable at any time of suddenly being dumb, prejudiced, or lacking in critical judgement.

Day after day you'd hear a fellow juror doing a great job of withholding judgement to collect information, asking insightful, appropriate questions of the arresting officer or DA, and then suddenly--on a different case--he or she would turn into "12 Angry Men" making no logical sense!

But on a positive note, the system still works better than most.
My fearless, God-fearing late wife served on a jury in a large city known for its corruption---and they convicted the local District Attorney!
I was so proud of her (always!)

 

[orangebloodgmc]

I served on a jury once, for what turned out to be a staged auto accident scam, with the sucker and her deep-pockets insurance company being sued for a million dollars.

The "suers" had not convinced the jury ... but in our deliberations, a few jurors said, well, since we can't tell for sure what actually happened ... we'll just award them $500,000.

I spoke right up and said, whoa whoa whoa, it don't work that way. So, the scammers got nothing that day. I know we did the right thing in the end. But it was kinda scary watching how it all unfolded.

 

[pimo1]

View attachment 568656
This book sheds lots of light on why so many "scary stories" exist--in courtrooms, police departments, inside the CIA, and certainly behind the headlines. It may shake you up, but I'd recommend anyone read it before serving jury duty.

My most recent jury duty was serving grand jury in Chattanooga. I came away from a rewarding experience realizing that, it's not that people are dumb or prejudiced or lack critical thinking skills... it's that some (maybe all of us) are capable at any time of suddenly being dumb, prejudiced, or lacking in critical judgement.

Day after day you'd hear a fellow juror doing a great job of withholding judgement to collect information, asking insightful, appropriate questions of the arresting officer or DA, and then suddenly--on a different case--he or she would turn into "12 Angry Men" making no logical sense!

But on a positive note, the system still works better than most.
My fearless, God-fearing late wife served on a jury in a large city known for its corruption---and they convicted the local District Attorney!
I was so proud of her (always!)

Agree with you totally. We are all humans and people forget that. Our justice system is flawed but I'm not aware of a better one. I tell my people all the time what I went through was my own fault for putting myself in that position and not understanding what I was walking into. Had I known what I know now things turn out way different. The justice system didn't fail me I failed to be aware of how things actually work. Lucky for me I learned on the fly and because I didn't have a record it was a one-time snag.

 

[BruisedOrange]

Agree with you totally. We are all humans and people forget that. Our justice system is flawed but I'm not aware of a better one. I tell my people all the time what I went through was my own fault for putting myself in that position and not understanding what I was walking into. Had I known what I know now things turn out way different. The justice system didn't fail me I failed to be aware of how things actually work. Lucky for me I learned on the fly and because I didn't have a record it was a one-time snag.

I think you continue to show a lot of wisdom. Hope you are able to inform and encourage others to "think their way around the course."

 

[Jravol78]

I was on a Grand Jury 15 years ago for 3 months we indicted every case brought before us, I think 103 cases. IMO there nothing Grand about it just a step that is almost pre-dictated. I had heard the words Grand Jury all my life not knowing much about the system, I thought it was really a privilege to be on the Grand Jury. I was basically shaking my head when it was over.

Was on a grand jury too, was definitely eye opening. Then sometime later it came out the foreman was a convicted felon . I am sure that took quite awhile for the DA to clean up. It was in Nashville too so we are talking a TON of cases that were heard during those 3 months.

 

[Remy]

There is an old saying about indictments. You can get one on a ham sandwich !View attachment 557446View attachment 557446

The prosecutor is under no requirement to provide any information which weakens any of the information he provides to the grand jury. There is no defensive information provided to the grand juries at all in most cases.

 

[tennrich1]

I served on a murder trial (sequestered for 2 weeks) several years ago. I did learn a little about our justice system ( I was jury foreman). But I also learned how scary it would be to have your fate in the hands of some jurist. Thankfully ours was fairly cut and dry and the killer was pretty obvious. He got life without parole.

 

[CincinnatiVols]

Would be a real shame if anyone on the jury knew about jury nullification.

also anyone interested in self defense, one of the top lawyers that specializes in self defense cases Andrew branca has a free book (just pay for A&M) called “law of self defense”. His slogan is carry a gun so your hard to kill, know the law so you are hard to convict”