PDA

View Full Version : Testimony postponed for grand jury investigating hit and run involving Marshawn Lynch


M
06-20-2008, 08:23 AM
http://www.buffalonews.com/258/story/374676.html

The three staffers GJ testimony has been postponted as well.
Jan Reimers
06-20-2008, 08:32 AM
Let's hope that some settlement of this case is close at hand. After almost 3 weeks, it really needs to be resolved.
shelby
06-20-2008, 08:38 AM
i agree.

From the article:

"I was planning to go to the grand jury with three team officials, and I was notified that their appearances were postponed," said Paul J. Cambria, an attorney for the Bills. "To me, that is an indication that Marshawn Lynch, his attorney and the district attorney are moving toward a resolution of this case."
Lynch's lawyer, Michael P. Caffery, traveled to California on Thursday to meet with Lynch, sources close to the case told The Buffalo News.


Sounds to me that Lynch may have been the driver after all.
Jan Reimers
06-20-2008, 08:49 AM
i agree.

From the article:


Sounds to me that Lynch may have been the driver after all.
What a surprise!:bandwagon
bigbub2352
06-20-2008, 09:06 AM
Be a man get it over with
TacklingDummy
06-20-2008, 09:09 AM
Lynch should be happy that he probably got away with DWI and that he didn't kill the woman. It's time to take his punishment and end this matter.
OpIv37
06-20-2008, 09:44 AM
do these things take 3 weeks to resolve when it's not a football player?

Also, I still don't know why team officials are being asked to testify. They weren't there so anything they say about the incident would be hearsay in court.
Dr. Lecter
06-20-2008, 09:45 AM
do these things take 3 weeks to resolve when it's not a football player?

Also, I still don't know why team officials are being asked to testify. They weren't there so anything they say about the incident would be hearsay in court.

In court yes, but not before a grand jury. There are different rules.
OpIv37
06-20-2008, 09:49 AM
In court yes, but not before a grand jury. There are different rules.


well that doesn't make a whole lot of sense because it's still evidence that wouldn't be admissible in court. The point of a grand jury is to determine if there's enough evidence to go to trial- seems counterproductive to have them listening to testimony that wouldn't hold up in a trial.
Dr. Lecter
06-20-2008, 09:52 AM
It is the fear of the indictment. Get the indictment and go forward from there.


Jack McCoy does it all the time.
M
06-20-2008, 09:56 AM
Jack McCoy does it all the time.

:rofl:
Mitchy moo
06-20-2008, 10:29 AM
We need a resolution.
Michael82
06-20-2008, 11:02 AM
It is the fear of the indictment. Get the indictment and go forward from there.


Jack McCoy does it all the time.
And that's where Clark learned how to be a DA. :ill:
blackonyx89
06-20-2008, 11:07 AM
We need a resolution.

And stop this madness.

Madness This Is Spartaaaa!!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZBA0SKmQy8