- 11 Dec 2018 16:58
#14971310
Motive and intent didn't seem very clear to me and I am wondering how the jury was convinced that he planned to kill protestors because he posted a meme on the internet and accused people of being anti-white communists.
I was also referring to the idea that he was not even been given the opportunity to have a fair trial after having been called a murderer by the president of the United States before there was a trial or even a proper investigation.
Even though Barack Obama was criticized for getting involved in a local law enforcement matter, even he did not accuse George Zimmerman of murdering Trayvon Martin before there was a trial.
Indeed Rich.
Some people have been comparing the James Fields incident with the Lizzie Grubman incident.
It was a very big story in the US because it involved a privileged individual doing something totally outrageous and seeming to assume that her privilege would prevent her from receiving serious penalties.
The case of Lizzie Grubman and James Fields are similar because 1) both involved cars running over a crowd, 2) both involved a heated conflict, 3) both incidents had intense media focus 4) to a lesser extent of the Grubman incident, race/ethnicity were factors.
The media attention was very different however as the media characterized the Grubman incident as a road rage accident while Fields was automatically accused of murder.
The fact that she only received 38 days of jail time and Fields was convicted of murder is proof that the majority of American courts are 3rd world corrupt monkey courts.
Lizzie Grubman just happens to be Jewish.
Lizzie Grubman
Publicist Lizzie Grubman makes tearful apology after court appearance
LIZZIE BIDS TO MOVE CIVIL TRIAL
JohnRawls wrote:I have 2 degrees maz. Well almost, one is being finished right now. One of them is law.
Your explanations are bullshit for common law or continental european law systems. Like it or not, he did commit murder and any sane judge or jury will understand that there was intent to kill people or to do harm to them. The chances of him being found "Not Guilty" in any court is around "0,000001%".
Like what exactly is not clear?
1) What he at the crime seen? (Yes, he was. He was seen in the car by a lot of people and cameras)
2) Was it his car? (Yes, as i understand it is officially registered to him)
3) Did he have motive ? (Yes, he expressed it in phone calls/posts and he also attended a rally that was counter protested by the guys he attacked)
4) Did he have intent ? (Yes, again phone calls, posts etc. Not to mention the whole video of him ramming the crowd and not pressing breaks before hitting them is a big sign of intent in itself even without all of the previous things)
5) Is there causation ? (Did his actions lead to death? Well, obviously it did. This was the reason that some people claimed the heart attack bullshit but no jury or judge will buy this BS unless its a 3rd world corrupt monkey court)
Motive and intent didn't seem very clear to me and I am wondering how the jury was convinced that he planned to kill protestors because he posted a meme on the internet and accused people of being anti-white communists.
I was also referring to the idea that he was not even been given the opportunity to have a fair trial after having been called a murderer by the president of the United States before there was a trial or even a proper investigation.
Even though Barack Obama was criticized for getting involved in a local law enforcement matter, even he did not accuse George Zimmerman of murdering Trayvon Martin before there was a trial.
Rich wrote:I think the OJ Simpson case showed that given the right jury and the right judge, you can get pretty much any result you want, regardless of the evidence.
Indeed Rich.
Some people have been comparing the James Fields incident with the Lizzie Grubman incident.
It was a very big story in the US because it involved a privileged individual doing something totally outrageous and seeming to assume that her privilege would prevent her from receiving serious penalties.
The case of Lizzie Grubman and James Fields are similar because 1) both involved cars running over a crowd, 2) both involved a heated conflict, 3) both incidents had intense media focus 4) to a lesser extent of the Grubman incident, race/ethnicity were factors.
The media attention was very different however as the media characterized the Grubman incident as a road rage accident while Fields was automatically accused of murder.
The fact that she only received 38 days of jail time and Fields was convicted of murder is proof that the majority of American courts are 3rd world corrupt monkey courts.
Lizzie Grubman just happens to be Jewish.
Lizzie Grubman
Elizabeth Grubman (born January 30, 1971) is an American publicist, manager and socialite.[1] She is the daughter of entertainment lawyer Allen Grubman and his first wife, the late Yvette Grubman.[2] In 2002, Grubman served 38 days in jail for an incident where she backed a Mercedes SUV into a crowd, injuring 16 people.[3][4]
2001 incident with an SUV[edit]
On July 7, 2001, after being asked by security guards to remove her Mercedes from a fire lane, Grubman intentionally drove her father´s Mercedes Benz SUV[12] into a crowd of people outside of the Conscience Point Inn at 1976 North Sea Road in the Hamptons, injuring 16 people. Grubman was later charged in a 26-count indictment with felony crimes including second-degree assault, driving while intoxicated, and reckless endangerment.[13]
The subsequent trial garnered widespread media coverage,[13][14][15] not only because of the particular circumstances of the crash, but because of what Richard Johnson, editor of the New York Post's Page Six, referred to as "the overreaching drama of class warfare."[16] Grubman was alleged to have made an inflammatory statement before striking her victims with her vehicle: "F*** you, white trash."[17] Later, allegations arose that she received "special treatment"[18] at the hands of police, who did not perform a Breathalyzer test[18] despite allegations, and later, criminal charges, that she was intoxicated at the time of the incident.[13][19]
Grubman has said that the SUV incident was an accident.[20]
In the criminal trial, Grubman faced up to eight years in prison, but served only thirty-eight days in jail and received five years' probation after reaching a plea bargain for leaving the scene of a car accident.[21]
Publicist Lizzie Grubman makes tearful apology after court appearance
RIVERHEAD, New York (Court TV) -- An emotional Lizzie Grubman apologized Thursday for any pain and suffering she caused 16 people she struck when she backed into them with her father's Mercedes SUV outside a Hamptons Nightclub last July.
"I want to say something. I just want to say how sorry I am that innocent people got hurt that night," Grubman, the 31-year-old celebrity publicist and daughter of entertainment lawyer Allen Grubman, said through her tears.
Grubman, whose client list has included Britney Spears and rapper Jay-Z, made the unexpected statement as she emerged from the Suffolk County, New York, courtroom Thursday morning to find a crowd of reporters and television cameras.
Suffolk County Court Judge John Mullin had just informed Grubman that he will let her know on August 16 when she will stand trial for a 26-count indictment that includes charges of assault, vehicular assault and driving while intoxicated.
After she spoke, Grubman, wearing a powder blue pantsuit, continued sobbing and rested her head on the shoulder of her lawyer, Stephen Scaring, as she walked with him from the courthouse to a black Chevrolet Suburban waiting for her in the parking lot.
On the night of the incident, July 7, 2001, Grubman was driving a black $70,000 Mercedes SUV that belonged to her father. Witnesses told police that Grubman became upset at the Conscience Point Inn, a popular night spot in Southampton, when the club bouncer asked her to move her vehicle from a fire lane.
Grubman allegedly shouted "white trash" before putting the car in gear and hitting the accelerator. The SUV lurched backward and struck a crowd of people waiting to get inside the nightclub.
According to the indictment and numerous lawsuits filed after the crash, 16 people were treated for injuries, which included broken bones and scrapes.
Scaring told Courttv.com that he believes the case will go to trial and that his strategy will be to attack the driving while intoxicated charge, which he says is the key to whether Grubman was criminally reckless. Grubman and her lawyers maintain that the incident was an accident and that she inadvertently put the vehicle in reverse.
When Grubman entered the courthouse at about 9:30 a.m. Thursday, she was composed and wasn't talking. She replied "no comment" when someone in the crowd asked whether she was prepared to go to prison.
After her lawyer and the prosecutor finished a 15-minute conference in the judge's chambers, Grubman looked sullen and briefly addressed reporters. She said that she has always felt sorry for what happened and asked that her feelings be conveyed to the victims.
If convicted of the most serious felonies, prosecutors say Grubman could face more than eight years in a state prison.
LIZZIE BIDS TO MOVE CIVIL TRIAL
Spin maven Lizzie Grubman wants the remaining civil suits against her moved to Albany, saying she can’t get a fair trial because of massive – and negative – publicity about her case.
“In the face of ongoing world events – including terrorist acts where people have been killed – Lizzie Grubman has been front-page news,” fumed her lawyer, John McDonough.
But at least one plaintiff’s lawyer, Andrew Siben, said he would “vigorously oppose” the motion.”
Siben, who represents club bouncer Scott Conlon, said the p.r. princess helped create the publicity herself by speaking to the media.
The bottle blonde spent 38 days in jail for backing her Mercedes SUV into 16 people outside a Southampton nightclub in July 2001.
She has settled suits filed by eight of her victims, including a deal reached yesterday involving injured entertainment promoter Adam Wacht, for a total of more than $5 million.
Wacht, who’s leg was broken, had sued Grubman for $30 million. The terms of the settlement were not disclosed.
Grubman still faces suits from five others in the Big Apple, as well as the suit filed by Conlon in Suffolk County. Legal sources said New York City juries are much more likely to award large damage awards than those in more Suffolk and Albany.
Meanwhile, on her first day back in the office yesterday, Lizzie signed up seven new clients, sources said.
She also met with probation officials, was assigned a probation officer and had lunch at Balthazar with her lawyers and senior staff.
Additional reporting by Jennifer Gould
Last edited by maz on 11 Dec 2018 17:17, edited 1 time in total.
- By Pants-of-dog
- By Saeko
- By Rugoz
- By JohnRawls