Murder at Lululemon in Bethesda

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seem to remember that she went to some kind of private school. So they must have a little change to put on the table.
I bet they will try to go with second degree and a mental problem. They will say that Jayna started it.

Since she was considered to be a good athlete, maybe she attended on a scholarship.

I meant for elementary school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how anyone could possible represent her. I personally couldn't live with myself. The firm has this statement on its website:
Criminal Defense
We provide aggressive legal representation for persons charged with crimes and serious motor vehicle offenses.
Our attorneys have obtained acquittals in all types of criminal cases, ranging from simple misdemeanors, to serious felonies, such as robbery, rape and murder.

Yuck!

You do realize that the criminal justice system in this country pretty much requires that there are lawyers out there willing to represent folks accused of crimes, right? And that sometimes, innocent people stuck with shitty attorneys are found guilty and languish in prison for decades?

I hope she gets good representation - one less reason why an appeal could be successful. I don't understand why you are equating a criminal defense atty with scum of the earth - without them, our legal system can't function.

[Anonymous]

I think the PP just isnt taking into account what role the defense attorneys have in our legal system at all. She is reacting from an emotional place only since the evidence looks so clear pointing at BN. Obviously defense attorneys are needed also for those who have been falsely accused. It is hard to believe that a defense attorney would truly believe she was a falsely accused at this point with the evidence the media has let out there but then again, who knows? And even still, it is their role to defend in the system to keep it in tact. I get all of that...
I know very little about the justice system so take this with a grain of salt please BUT I am wondering why a defense attorney with the evidence even that they have exposed to the public would assume getting her off completely would be a better choice than pleading temporary insanity or self defense? Keeping in mind if he fails and she is found guilty then it is straight to sentencing probably life in imprisonment, no? Am I missing something? I have a feeling I am....I read somewhere that they always plead not guilty and then AFTER that they can consider plea bargains? Can anyone explain this to those of us who dont understand the steps that are taken in the system?

[Anonymous]

They have to enter a plea long before they have decided on a defense strategy. Therefore the only thing to do is to enter "not guilty" and then change it once they know what they are doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seem to remember that she went to some kind of private school. So they must have a little change to put on the table.
I bet they will try to go with second degree and a mental problem. They will say that Jayna started it.

Since she was considered to be a good athlete, maybe she attended on a scholarship.

More likely attended on affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seem to remember that she went to some kind of private school. So they must have a little change to put on the table.
I bet they will try to go with second degree and a mental problem. They will say that Jayna started it.

Since she was considered to be a good athlete, maybe she attended on a scholarship.

More likely attended on affirmative action.

Because black people are inferior and incompetent, except when it comes to athletics, right? Why don't you just put your racism front and center next time in stead of hiding behind belabored bullshit like this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seem to remember that she went to some kind of private school. So they must have a little change to put on the table.
I bet they will try to go with second degree and a mental problem. They will say that Jayna started it.

Since she was considered to be a good athlete, maybe she attended on a scholarship.

More likely attended on affirmative action.

Sweetie, I know a blond blue eyed guy from Utah who got into Stanford on a volley ball scholarship with 500's on each part of the SATs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seem to remember that she went to some kind of private school. So they must have a little change to put on the table.
I bet they will try to go with second degree and a mental problem. They will say that Jayna started it.

Since she was considered to be a good athlete, maybe she attended on a scholarship.

More likely attended on affirmative action.

Sweetie, I know a blond blue eyed guy from Utah who got into Stanford on a volley ball scholarship with 500's on each part of the SATs.

Actually, if you could put aside your assumptions, a person's "coloring" doesn't necessarily indicate race, ethnicity, minority status, or whatever you want to call it. My cousin is brilliant but did get preferred status by several Ivy League colleges because of her mom's Spanish background. She's a blue-eyed blonde.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seem to remember that she went to some kind of private school. So they must have a little change to put on the table.
I bet they will try to go with second degree and a mental problem. They will say that Jayna started it.

Since she was considered to be a good athlete, maybe she attended on a scholarship.

More likely attended on affirmative action.

Sweetie, I know a blond blue eyed guy from Utah who got into Stanford on a volley ball scholarship with 500's on each part of the SATs.

Actually, if you could put aside your assumptions, a person's "coloring" doesn't necessarily indicate race, ethnicity, minority status, or whatever you want to call it. My cousin is brilliant but did get preferred status by several Ivy League colleges because of her mom's Spanish background. She's a blue-eyed blonde.

Oh, let me clarify (sorry to offend the jillions of very blond Spaniards) he was of NO ethnic minority. An athlete of any race gets preference because they bring money into the schools, lots of money, especially basketball. But that said, BN was an ATHLETE.

[Anonymous]

An article in yesterday's Gazette on workplace safety for small retail stores-

Professional Debate Events Leading up to death at Lululemon Athletica in Bethesda

http://www.gazette.net/stories/03302011/chevnew205445_32537.php

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the PP just isnt taking into account what role the defense attorneys have in our legal system at all. She is reacting from an emotional place only since the evidence looks so clear pointing at BN. Obviously defense attorneys are needed also for those who have been falsely accused. It is hard to believe that a defense attorney would truly believe she was a falsely accused at this point with the evidence the media has let out there but then again, who knows? And even still, it is their role to defend in the system to keep it in tact. I get all of that...
I know very little about the justice system so take this with a grain of salt please BUT I am wondering why a defense attorney with the evidence even that they have exposed to the public would assume getting her off completely would be a better choice than pleading temporary insanity or self defense? Keeping in mind if he fails and she is found guilty then it is straight to sentencing probably life in imprisonment, no? Am I missing something? I have a feeling I am....I read somewhere that they always plead not guilty and then AFTER that they can consider plea bargains? Can anyone explain this to those of us who dont understand the steps that are taken in the system?

The burden is on the prosecutor to guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The defense doesn't have to prove she didn't do it. There are NO WITNESSES. There is NO CERTAIN MOTIVE. She may have tried to leave with the stolen merch and Jayna tried to physically restrain her --a fight broke out, escalated and she killed her in self defense.

She could win this at trial. Price Tag= $100k minimum, though.

[Anonymous]

PP here-to PROVE guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the PP just isnt taking into account what role the defense attorneys have in our legal system at all. She is reacting from an emotional place only since the evidence looks so clear pointing at BN. Obviously defense attorneys are needed also for those who have been falsely accused. It is hard to believe that a defense attorney would truly believe she was a falsely accused at this point with the evidence the media has let out there but then again, who knows? And even still, it is their role to defend in the system to keep it in tact. I get all of that...
I know very little about the justice system so take this with a grain of salt please BUT I am wondering why a defense attorney with the evidence even that they have exposed to the public would assume getting her off completely would be a better choice than pleading temporary insanity or self defense? Keeping in mind if he fails and she is found guilty then it is straight to sentencing probably life in imprisonment, no? Am I missing something? I have a feeling I am....I read somewhere that they always plead not guilty and then AFTER that they can consider plea bargains? Can anyone explain this to those of us who dont understand the steps that are taken in the system?

The burden is on the prosecutor to guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The defense doesn't have to prove she didn't do it. There are NO WITNESSES. There is NO CERTAIN MOTIVE. She may have tried to leave with the stolen merch and Jayna tried to physically restrain her --a fight broke out, escalated and she killed her in self defense.
She could win this at trial. Price Tag= $100k minimum, though.

But I think the prosecution's argument will be then why did she try to cover up the crime and tell lie after lie? Why did she move Jayna's car. And most importantly, why did it result in Jayna being killed in such a brutal manner? If it was self-defense, perhaps she would have hit Jayna with the hammer to knock her out, but not then continue to disfigure her for 20 minutes afterward. Plus, the way it sounds so far, her lawyers are claiming that she couldn't possibly have done it because of her size, noy that it was self defense. She might not end up getting a life term, but there's no way she walks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seem to remember that she went to some kind of private school. So they must have a little change to put on the table.
I bet they will try to go with second degree and a mental problem. They will say that Jayna started it.

Since she was considered to be a good athlete, maybe she attended on a scholarship.

More likely attended on affirmative action.

Because black people are inferior and incompetent, except when it comes to athletics, right? Why don't you just put your racism front and center next time in stead of hiding behind belabored bullshit like this?

I didn't say that but affirmative action gives you extra points even if you are qualified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the PP just isnt taking into account what role the defense attorneys have in our legal system at all. She is reacting from an emotional place only since the evidence looks so clear pointing at BN. Obviously defense attorneys are needed also for those who have been falsely accused. It is hard to believe that a defense attorney would truly believe she was a falsely accused at this point with the evidence the media has let out there but then again, who knows? And even still, it is their role to defend in the system to keep it in tact. I get all of that...
I know very little about the justice system so take this with a grain of salt please BUT I am wondering why a defense attorney with the evidence even that they have exposed to the public would assume getting her off completely would be a better choice than pleading temporary insanity or self defense? Keeping in mind if he fails and she is found guilty then it is straight to sentencing probably life in imprisonment, no? Am I missing something? I have a feeling I am....I read somewhere that they always plead not guilty and then AFTER that they can consider plea bargains? Can anyone explain this to those of us who dont understand the steps that are taken in the system?

The burden is on the prosecutor to guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The defense doesn't have to prove she didn't do it. There are NO WITNESSES. There is NO CERTAIN MOTIVE. She may have tried to leave with the stolen merch and Jayna tried to physically restrain her --a fight broke out, escalated and she killed her in self defense.
She could win this at trial. Price Tag= $100k minimum, though.

But I think the prosecution's argument will be then why did she try to cover up the crime and tell lie after lie? Why did she move Jayna's car. And most importantly, why did it result in Jayna being killed in such a brutal manner? If it was self-defense, perhaps she would have hit Jayna with the hammer to knock her out, but not then continue to disfigure her for 20 minutes afterward. Plus, the way it sounds so far, her lawyers are claiming that she couldn't possibly have done it because of her size, noy that it was self defense. She might not end up getting a life term, but there's no way she walks.

I've seen worse fact patterns where D has walked. Unless DA puts a very strong ADA on this case, she could totally walk. A weak ADA can lose a slam dunk case. It happens all the time. Did you not follow the OJ case?