They clearly didn’t have that information. They discussed the fact that the only evidence they had was that Gabby had hit him. He was the one that was visibly injured. The second-guessers-after the fact-in hindsight on here are amazing. Even watching the video in hindsight, if you try to put out of your mind what you know, she looks upset and stressed, but not clearly mentally incompetent. I had a friend whose son was seriously mentally ill, and the police are very limited in what they can do and how long they can hold someone, even when they are a danger to themselves or others. If you don’t like that, talk to the ACLU. |
And I'm pretty sure you'd be stricken by the prosecutor as a potential juror, if you diagnosed him as mentally ill based on the body cam footage and think this should affect his culpability. Yes, this is assuming that he is eventually charged. |
Maybe they should have, in a perfect world, but the incident had already been reported, and the dispatcher had sent multiple units who were talking to the people in question, so it’s understandable that the dispatcher wouldn’t have necessarily called to say — “hey, someone else called and reported a different version of the same incident.” |
+1 and also I didn't say bipolar because that is not what i meant. There are many types of mental illness that cause one to have manic episodes. You are projecting. |
|
Link? I thought his family was not talking to police at all and only speaking through an attorney? |
|
If someone else was a witness to Gabby and Brian’s scuffle, then they should have had their statements submitted to the police stat.
It appears this was not done, as the police were seen on their body cam footage saying that no one saw Brian strike Gabby. However it is interesting to note that initially the police report stated that someone had seen Brian strike Gabby but it was later redacted. Also interesting is the fact that the police discussed two witness accounts, etc.? How could someone report to 911 that they saw a couple arguing where one person struck the other person and yet while the cops spent close to an hr and a half speaking to Gabby & Brian, this information was never properly relayed to them? There was plenty of time to forward this piece of very important, pivotal information. Just a thirty second call from the dispatcher. So either the call was made and the on scene cops chose to ignore it or the info was never given - both these show shoddy police work. And sadly Gabby was made to feel like the aggressor due to this mistake. The non-profit should have paid for a room for her instead of the true aggressor. |
A great question for potential jurors would be: have you visited the dcurbanmom website in the last x months |
| If he were truly innocent, he could still have retained counsel while also assisting police with the search. The two are not mutually exclusive. |
Because he's white, duh. |
I noticed the inconsistency in report from caller and the police report also. |
This. Especially if he was worried about her. |
| Gabby did tell the police that he grabbed her face/chin, and she clarified that he did not lift her with his hand while doing that, only grabbed her face... IIRC. That was concerning to me. Immediately made me think of my mom's abusive ex-bf grabbing her face in the same manner. |
| It is lazy and immoral in this circumstance for a lawyer just to say “clam up.” |
Gabby told officer she was OCD and upset cleaning the back of the van. But in this video, she wore her shoes in the van, but not Brian? There's only 1 pair of sandals in back on the ground. And, as others mentioned, this site was not ideal with a lot of brush (for cover), but had a strategic opening into that meadow area near the back of the van. So, I think this video was taken post mortem, same day. Best guess. |