Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

All W parents can use him for their rape cases too, 64 sexual assaults in MoCo schools just this year.

Source?

Anonymous wrote:

All W parents can use him for their rape cases too, 64 sexual assaults in MoCo schools just this year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And here's a pair of high-priced defense attorneys representing the other accused -- they've never met the kid, but they get on Fox News defending him and pivot to pro-immigration talking points. Interesting.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/first-100-days/index.html#/v/5372032730001

dum-dum, I would imagine most criminal attorneys are unfamiliar with their clients before they take their cases.
Sheesh!!!

Anonymous wrote:And here's a pair of high-priced defense attorneys representing the other accused -- they've never met the kid, but they get on Fox News defending him and pivot to pro-immigration talking points. Interesting.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/first-100-days/index.html#/v/5372032730001

Anonymous wrote:What happened to the discussion of last night's Tucker Carlson interview?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The police spokesperson said it was a brutal attack. I don't think they would be making that up, or standing by their claim if there were not evidence to support it. Good luck with that bond hearing.

It sure sounded like a brutal attack based on the victim's statement that was in the police report. I assume the police went based on that, since the perpetrators at that point had not presented a defense.

From the report I read, the perpetrators denied having sex when questioned by police. Guess the police let them know they had DNA, or some type of evidence, to convince them to admit. Their only defense is to say it was consensual. So, they will no doubt try to shame this poor girl to convince a jury that it was consensual and that she is lying. If the evidence indicates it was a brutal as described, I doubt that defense will fly. I don’t care if there are texts between two of them. Supposedly, she said she would have sex in the gym room. Well, the boy’s bathroom is NOT the gym. And, the texts didn’t say she consented to sex with both boys (at least according to their attorneys).

Still wondering who is paying for these attorneys. They can’t be cheap. And, I can’t believe they are taking this case pro bono.

I think it's definitely possible.

There is a huge ILLEGAL immigrant population in Montgomery County. If this attorney wins this case, it could mean big business for him. HUGE. Bigger than he's seen before!! Lol

But seriously, often times, illegal immigrants pay for services in cash so it makes business sense to attract them as clients. If Jezic wins, he will be the guy in the area that ALL illegal immigrants know to go to for help. He'll be set!

All W parents can use him for their rape cases too, 64 sexual assaults in MoCo schools just this year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The police spokesperson said it was a brutal attack. I don't think they would be making that up, or standing by their claim if there were not evidence to support it. Good luck with that bond hearing.

It sure sounded like a brutal attack based on the victim's statement that was in the police report. I assume the police went based on that, since the perpetrators at that point had not presented a defense.

From the report I read, the perpetrators denied having sex when questioned by police. Guess the police let them know they had DNA, or some type of evidence, to convince them to admit. Their only defense is to say it was consensual. So, they will no doubt try to shame this poor girl to convince a jury that it was consensual and that she is lying. If the evidence indicates it was a brutal as described, I doubt that defense will fly. I don’t care if there are texts between two of them. Supposedly, she said she would have sex in the gym room. Well, the boy’s bathroom is NOT the gym. And, the texts didn’t say she consented to sex with both boys (at least according to their attorneys).

Still wondering who is paying for these attorneys. They can’t be cheap. And, I can’t believe they are taking this case pro bono.

I think it's definitely possible.

There is a huge ILLEGAL immigrant population in Montgomery County. If this attorney wins this case, it could mean big business for him. HUGE. Bigger than he's seen before!! Lol

But seriously, often times, illegal immigrants pay for services in cash so it makes business sense to attract them as clients. If Jezic wins, he will be the guy in the area that ALL illegal immigrants know to go to for help. He'll be set!

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't the prosecution seek evidence of their actual ages? The dad of one is in custody, can't they make him produce a birth certificate or something?

I suspect the men are more like 19 and 20 if not older. In that case, both are least guilt of statutory rape. Open and shut.

Why do you suspect that?

Because I watched a documentary on border crossers from Central America and they all lied about their age to qualify for unaccompanied minor catch & release and various services.

Exactly.
Someone please explain why they WOULDN'T lie?

Folks, your suspicions about the age of the suspects is not on topic for this thread. Regardless of the television shows you have watched, you are not capable of determining age from a single photo. If there is a question about the age of the boys, it will be addressed in court, not on DCUM. Please refrain from further posts on this topic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The police spokesperson said it was a brutal attack. I don't think they would be making that up, or standing by their claim if there were not evidence to support it. Good luck with that bond hearing.

It sure sounded like a brutal attack based on the victim's statement that was in the police report. I assume the police went based on that, since the perpetrators at that point had not presented a defense.

From the report I read, the perpetrators denied having sex when questioned by police. Guess the police let them know they had DNA, or some type of evidence, to convince them to admit. Their only defense is to say it was consensual. So, they will no doubt try to shame this poor girl to convince a jury that it was consensual and that she is lying. If the evidence indicates it was a brutal as described, I doubt that defense will fly. I don’t care if there are texts between two of them. Supposedly, she said she would have sex in the gym room. Well, the boy’s bathroom is NOT the gym. And, the texts didn’t say she consented to sex with both boys (at least according to their attorneys).

Still wondering who is paying for these attorneys. They can’t be cheap. And, I can’t believe they are taking this case pro bono.

I think it's definitely possible.

There is a huge ILLEGAL immigrant population in Montgomery County. If this attorney wins this case, it could mean big business for him. HUGE. Bigger than he's seen before!! Lol

But seriously, often times, illegal immigrants pay for services in cash so it makes business sense to attract them as clients. If Jezic wins, he will be the guy in the area that ALL illegal immigrants know to go to for help. He'll be set!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The police spokesperson said it was a brutal attack. I don't think they would be making that up, or standing by their claim if there were not evidence to support it. Good luck with that bond hearing.

It sure sounded like a brutal attack based on the victim's statement that was in the police report. I assume the police went based on that, since the perpetrators at that point had not presented a defense.

From the report I read, the perpetrators denied having sex when questioned by police. Guess the police let them know they had DNA, or some type of evidence, to convince them to admit. Their only defense is to say it was consensual. So, they will no doubt try to shame this poor girl to convince a jury that it was consensual and that she is lying. If the evidence indicates it was a brutal as described, I doubt that defense will fly. I don’t care if there are texts between two of them. Supposedly, she said she would have sex in the gym room. Well, the boy’s bathroom is NOT the gym. And, the texts didn’t say she consented to sex with both boys (at least according to their attorneys).

Still wondering who is paying for these attorneys. They can’t be cheap. And, I can’t believe they are taking this case pro bono.