Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schneed10
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FRPLG
Not sure what legal credentials you have but I have none and even I know that whatever evidence there is the defense has to know about it. It is called discovery and it is a basic tenant of our US justice system. The prosecution doesn't get to surprise the dfense with evidence come trial time.
|
I'm also not a lawyer, but I know this to be true as well. If the prosecution has evidence, it must by law share it with the defense. |
No, but this is a common misperception thanks to television shows. The prosecution has to disclose any
exculpatory evidence. That is, they can't just sit on evidence that would tend to show the defendant is innocent. They don't have to open their files to the defendant, though.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...2/ai_111496590
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schneed10
I'm not certain, but I believe the definition of aggravated assault is simply an assault using a deadly weapon. Since an assault just represents a threat to do harm to someone, all Taylor has to do is point a gun at someone and that equals aggravated assault. I don't think firing it is required to qualify for aggravated assault. But a lawyer would be able to confirm.
|
As someone posted above, it's more than that. There is an increased intent requirement on the part of the defendant.
01-23-2006, 10:25 AM
Threaded Mode