Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

11,579 profile views

ChesterCopperpot1's Achievements

Hall Of Famer

Hall Of Famer (5/5)

  1. Detective Baker’s credibility is shot the moment she testified she assumes a the accused is guilty of a crime and it’s up to the accused to prove his innocence. That’s not the way our system is set up.
  2. Court of public opinion doesn’t exist because there’s never a verdict/evidence/rulings etc.
  3. Well yes, that is correct. But in cases like these, there is no physical evidence. A detective can’t testify “I came to the scene and found X, y, and Z here”. Bc that doesn’t exist. The evidence is the statements of the alleged victims. And it’s stronger coming from the alleged victim than a detective. Also at trial, it’s actually admissible coming from the alleged victim.
  4. Huh. Didn’t know that on the grand jury the rules of evidence don’t apply. I wonder if the same is true here in TN. I don’t practice criminal law, though. Thanks for that clarification. It seems silly to permit hearsay in a grand jury when it wouldn’t be admissible at trial.
  5. So a detective’s opinion on whether crimes were committed are not relevant. Your opinion doesn’t matter. It doesn’t make whether he committed a crime more or less true. This detective almost certainly didn’t witness the crime, otherwise the detective would have certainly testified. Further, anything the alleged victims told the detective would be considered hearsay. The only reason for the detective to testify is if Watson was interviewed and they needed to get his statements in the record.
  6. Statute of limitations is 2 years in Texas. Assuming he hasn’t been getting any massages since the first allegations. Probably won’t be any more lawsuits after a few more months.
  7. I don’t consider myself a legal expert by any means. I’m just a civil defense trial lawyer and this is up my alley. I’m obviously not licensed in Tx—I think @TitansPDO is, so he can provide more insight than I can. But it really does depend. If they’re calling different massages for the sole purpose of him jacking off on these girls without their consent, then they can create a cause of action. But I don’t think that’s the case here based on what we’ve seen. If he’s just like “hey Tina at the front desk, set me up a massage” and she does it and that’s that, then no. That’s why I don’t think it will survive MSJ. I would feel better about my predict in federal court. Article III judges are better than state court judges. But there’s no diversity of parties here, so there would be no basis to remove to federal court.
  8. There’s also more to it than this. There’s probably a lack of duty of care argument to it as well. Texans will likely try to move to dismiss. That bar is high and is probably going to fail. Summary judgment standard is lower than dismissal, which is why I think it’ll never survive summary judgment.
  9. It’s more nuanced than not gonna matter, but In essence, it’s not gonna matter. Getting jacked of by a massage therapist isn’t in the course and scope of his employment with the Texans.
  • Create New...