greg kelley's guilty verdict overturned

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

1 hour ago, AUS-97HORN said:

whats more amazing is the completely fucked up investigation by Dailey has been known since literally the day he took the stand in the writ trial in '17.

His response to what a cops job is and saying (paraphrase) "to help get a conviction" was just stunning for anyone to hear.  the fact he said that under oath in a courtroom and truely didnt understand the implications of what he had just said,  makes that even more unbelievable.

He wasnt even taken off whatever task force he was leading as a Sgt until sometime after Greg was declared innocent.

 

you are a senior officer in the police force, and one of your minions just basically admitted to being a lazy fuck during a crucial investigation that was high profile, then admitted under oath that he was more concerned about getting a conviction than helping find the truth  and NO ONE  does anything to him for almost 3 years?

Not sure if you can have a union rep if you are a leader in the police force.  I know that most union gig protections end when you become management

meaning if thats true, that clown could have been fired --- i mean he still would have been eligible to go to Burnet county and be a cop there, but at least he wouldnt be in a position of leadership in CP.

 

It was a Freudian slip if I’ve ever heard one lol. He took a nervous sip right after he said it, like “damn, maybe shouldn’t have admitted that”. But it’s the sad truth.

[Cajun 11748]

It was honest.  Probably the only honest thing the guys said or did through this ordeal. 

And, for so many LEOs, saying something honest on the stand or in a report that doesn't advance their cause is, by definition, "a mistake".

It also framed quite nicely that there is a myth, a sterotype, a "given" that way too many people buy into (especially jurors) - Cops/Detectives are smart.  Not so much.

 

Edited July 22, 2020 by Cajun

[4th and 5 4918]

On 7/20/2020 at 10:44 PM, Larry T. Spider said:

I don’t understand how Cummings didn’t turn this around and put Dailey on trial. A good attorney could have just destroyed that guy.

When I saw Dailey testify....to me, that's like blood in the water to a shark. I wanted some of that so bad.

On 7/21/2020 at 7:57 AM, BrickTop said:

Strategy and tactics aside, wouldn’t the ineffective counsel allegations be buoyed by Hampton’s disassembly of Dailey’s own lack of effort in the investigation? Not showing up to the daycare, sitting in on the cac interview(the one that later recanted) the lack of any photo identification at all of Greg kelley himself at any point, seems he was only identified by name, the child interview expert who pretty much broke down how bad the cac interview itself was and about how easy kids can be led into a false story, why wasn’t any of these points brought in the initial trial? And if they were how in the hell do you convict beyond a reasonable doubt.

It's inexplicable. She left so much meat on the bone.

Also, the lady expert....I'd hit that.

[Cajun 11748]

Oh, it's not inexplicable, imo.

She sandbagged to protect John.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

If nothing else, she knew she’s had a lot of business because of the McCarty family. Accusing Shama’s son of super aggregated sexual assault of a child might just end that relationship for good lol. She thought she could win the case without getting Jonathan involved. 

[Gourmand 7774]

If nothing else, she knew she’s had a lot of business because of the McCarty family. Accusing Shama’s son of super aggregated sexual assault of a child might just end that relationship for good lol. She thought she could win the case without getting Jonathan involved. 

.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

6 minutes ago, Gourmand said:

.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
 

Haha yeah I’ve made it pretty clear I don’t know how any of this shit works. Either way, your girl fucked this case up pretty badly. 

[Gourmand 7774]

I’ll take Stubborn, Contrary Opinions That Make Surly Think I’m Family for $1,000, Alex. 

Y'all are doing are great job with baseless speculation not supported by the trial record, you don't need me to interrupt your helium balloon huffing to see who can sound the silliest.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

15 minutes ago, Dr. Beeper said:

That business had to have been a fraction of her income. 

I get it. I’m just trying to justify his someone can be that good at their job but be that brain dead in this case. None of it makes sense 

[TwiceHorn 31539]

On 7/14/2020 at 11:23 AM, Gourmand said:

Why is that? Genuinely asking.

This is what troubles me.  Her general strategery is defensible if you don't overindulge hindsight bias.

But there appears to be an inference that her prior representation of McCarty may have influenced how she proceeded with Kelley.  And some of her "tactical" decisions seem like they might have been influenced.

Edited July 22, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Gourmand 7774]

This is what troubles me.  Her general strategery is defensible if you don't overindulge hindsight bias.
But there appears to be an inference that her prior representation of McCarty may have influenced how she proceeded with Kelley.

She never represented him. Wtf.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[Larry T. Spider 1747]

45 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

I get it. I’m just trying to justify his someone can be that good at their job but be that brain dead in this case. None of it makes sense 

Username and all that

[Cajun 11748]

8 hours ago, Dr. Beeper said:

Why? What’s the point?  That entire family of Gypsies sucks. 

Motivations are not always obvious, but she sandbagged and then pivoted from protecting him to protecting herself.

Why?  We'll never know, but it probably has something to do with her representation of the McCarty's prior to representing Kelley.

Just my perception.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Cajun

[Larry T. Spider 1747]

She didn’t have to make the connection to Mccarty to skewer Daileys ass. She acts like she thinks he did it and is sitting on some evidence she doesn’t want to share. I don’t think this is true, it’s just how she’s acting. She’s the only one not completely incensed at the sham investigation. He got a more vigorous defense from strangers going to the media.

[Cajun 11748]

I just shortened it to "sandbagged", but yeah, everything you just said Larry, save for the her thinking Greg did it.

I think she thought John may have done it and didn't want that to ever be in play.  Hence, she worked her defense around him, much as Greg surmised.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Cajun

[CurlyDumps 4485]

10 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

She didn’t have to make the connection to Mccarty to skewer Daileys ass.

Not trying to be contrarian but how do we know she didn’t? Have you read/seen her entire cross examination with Dailey?  Did she bring him up in closing arguments?

Edited July 23, 2020 by CurlyDumps

[Larry T. Spider 1747]

14 minutes ago, CurlyDumps said:

Not trying to be contrarian but how do we know she didn’t? Have you read/seen her entire cross examination with Dailey?  Did she bring him up in closing arguments?

I’ve read parts of it. She gets Dailey to admit that he did not follow best practices and asked leading questions to the children. You also have another victim recanting his story live via video in front of the jury. That’s the whole trial right there.

Either she didn’t beat this home and call numerous expert witnesses to testify about how improper the questioning was OR you got the most mouth breather jury of all time. Possibly both.

If I’m on the jury, I don’t know how I could convict anybody after the second child recants. I like to think that it would have caused me to lose faith in the prosecution. But, I also taught 4 year olds for 8 years and know how their brains work a little more than the average juror, I guess. 

The second kid was used as support for the skeptical jurors that might not believe a young child. “But how could two kids come up with the same story independently”? Well, they didn’t but we still convicted the guy...

[Larry T. Spider 1747]

On a personal note, I was teaching children of the same age during this trial. At first I was pissed at GK because fuck child molesters, but also because it made my job more difficult in terms of building trust with families. When it was obvious that he was getting railroaded, I talked to my principal and said I needed to teach older kids the next year. Never went back and eventually got into campus administration. Every man is one false accusation away from losing their career, freedom, and reputation. And don’t expect hundreds of people to show up for you like GK.

[CurlyDumps 4485]

Yeah, it’s always comforting when a juror admits he voted to convict because he was tired and wanted to go home. Way to do your civic duty there, bud.

[deadshank 24653]

9 minutes ago, CurlyDumps said:

Yeah, it’s always comforting when a juror admits he voted to convict because he was tired and wanted to go home. Way to do your civic duty there, bud.

That applies with hooking up with fat girls. 

[Red Six 131]

12 hours ago, Cajun said:

Motivations are not always obvious, but she sandbagged and then pivoted from protecting him to protecting herself.

Why?  We'll never know, but it probably has something to do with her representation of the McCarty's prior to representing Kelley.

Just my perception.

Her representation of the McCartys was for petty stuff like hot checks or something like that. Not something you make a living on, especially compared with a multi-complainant agg sex assault of a child case.

Dig up James McDermott's affidavit that he wrote for the writ hearing. Apparently there was some evasiveness from Greg when discussing the case that may have made going down the McCarty trail difficult.

I don't know when Pamela's last major felony trial before this was. She usually could walk in and make things happen without throwing down. She had sharp co-counsel at trial but things were clearly missed, e.g., the rebuttal character witness who never should have been able to testify. Frankly, she probably got cocky, thought Greg's innocence was patently obvious to anyone breathing, and misfired. It probably doesn't reach constitutional levels of IAC, but it's not her best performance, either. She checked the professional boxes, but didn't execute. Once you put the ball in play, it can take funny bounces, and the client can end up taking it on the chin.

[Reagan1k 3024]

3 hours ago, Red Six said:

Frankly, she probably got cocky, thought Greg's innocence was patently obvious to anyone breathing, and misfired. It probably doesn't reach constitutional levels of IAC, but it's not her best performance, either. She checked the professional boxes, but didn't execute. Once you put the ball in play, it can take funny bounces, and the client can end up taking it on the chin.

I was critical of her up-thread and certainly thought there might be something fishy going on with her defense and subsequent actions based on how it was portrayed in the documentary. However, I am willing to concede that my tin foil hat may have been a little too tight on my head and entertain the above as well.  

My only close experience with a criminal trial involved a similar situation with the roles reversed.  The defendant was clearly guilty, the defense threw a hail Mary strategy that was absurd to anyone with the IQ of a potato and the prosecutor got cocky.  They didn't destroy that defense; I guess assuming the jury would be laughing at it during deliberations and the jury ended up hung instead.

My connection to the case (victim was a relative) had to endure another trial where justice was ultimately served.

I can see how she might have thought the investigation was so poor and the evidence so weak that she didn't need to hammer away and she got sideswiped by the jury.  Her prior relationship with the McCarty family may or may not have played a role in how she handled that or how vigorously she pushed....thinking "I don't need to even go there and hurt another family".  Right or wrong, none of us will ever know short of her doing some mea culpa  down the line.

The whole thing is sad, fucked up, and a huge black eye for the LEOs involved.  It should also be a warning to everyone that a successful prosecution vs. the truth is far, far too often the end goal. 

[Cajun 11748]

21 hours ago, Red Six said:

Her representation of the McCartys was for petty stuff like hot checks or something like that. Not something you make a living on, especially compared with a multi-complainant agg sex assault of a child case.

Dig up James McDermott's affidavit that he wrote for the writ hearing. Apparently there was some evasiveness from Greg when discussing the case that may have made going down the McCarty trail difficult.

I don't know when Pamela's last major felony trial before this was. She usually could walk in and make things happen without throwing down. She had sharp co-counsel at trial but things were clearly missed, e.g., the rebuttal character witness who never should have been able to testify. Frankly, she probably got cocky, thought Greg's innocence was patently obvious to anyone breathing, and misfired. It probably doesn't reach constitutional levels of IAC, but it's not her best performance, either. She checked the professional boxes, but didn't execute. Once you put the ball in play, it can take funny bounces, and the client can end up taking it on the chin.

Fair enough.  Like I said, it was my perception and that was formed mostly from watching the documentary and I get that the makers weren't above skewing to fit a narrative.

I'll try to find and read that affidavit.

[4th and 5 4918]

On 7/23/2020 at 11:25 AM, Red Six said:

Her representation of the McCartys was for petty stuff like hot checks or something like that. Not something you make a living on, especially compared with a multi-complainant agg sex assault of a child case.

Dig up James McDermott's affidavit that he wrote for the writ hearing. Apparently there was some evasiveness from Greg when discussing the case that may have made going down the McCarty trail difficult.

I don't know when Pamela's last major felony trial before this was. She usually could walk in and make things happen without throwing down. She had sharp co-counsel at trial but things were clearly missed, e.g., the rebuttal character witness who never should have been able to testify. Frankly, she probably got cocky, thought Greg's innocence was patently obvious to anyone breathing, and misfired. It probably doesn't reach constitutional levels of IAC, but it's not her best performance, either. She checked the professional boxes, but didn't execute. Once you put the ball in play, it can take funny bounces, and the client can end up taking it on the chin.

Patricia rep’d the McCarty boys on charges heavier than a theft by check and the like. 

[GreenspointTexas 9678]

Its still shocking to me that all my 4 year old twins have to do to put our nanny away for 25 years is just to tell a cop that the nanny made them touch her cooter

 

Regardless of if its true or not, thats all it takes to get 25 years from someone. That is fucking insane

 

This documentary made me ragey and Duty, Geoffrey, the other asst DA, Mannix, and Dailey should all be in jail for 3 years

[Revolution512 1495]

Jury of your peers....frightening

[LTtxfan 49363]

Fyi...

 

[mchookem 16397]

well, that sucks 😕

[VolenteHawk 495]

11 hours ago, GreenspointTexas said:

This documentary made me ragey and Duty, Geoffrey, the other asst DA, Mannix, and Dailey should all be in jail for 3 years

[williemackgarza 1826]

Come on herman! Do it!
Cool, Kthanxbai, hookem

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

20 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

Fyi...

 

That seems like a bit of an overreaction but whatever. Hopefully this doesn’t put an end to his dream 

[Longhorn 145]

26 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

That seems like a bit of an overreaction but whatever. Hopefully this doesn’t put an end to his dream 

I’m in it sure if it’s an overreaction. It seems like a good move to keep the team safe. 
 

Marches and protests in large crowds are a lot less dangerous as it relates to Covid than admitting an individual to the team. We have to draw the line somewhere for the safety of the team.

[AUS-97HORN 11824]

55 minutes ago, Longhorn said:

I’m in it sure if it’s an overreaction. It seems like a good move to keep the team safe. 
 

Marches and protests in large crowds are a lot less dangerous as it relates to Covid than admitting an individual to the team. We have to draw the line somewhere for the safety of the team.

I get the sarcasm, but honestly, the chances of us even having a season this fall are getting closer and closer to zero.   

This may literally be the classic mute point 

-JK, moot point bitches.

 

 

[Longhorn 145]

6 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

I get the sarcasm, but honestly, the chances of us even having a season this fall are getting closer and closer to zero.   

This may literally be the classic mute point 

-JK, moot point bitches.

 

 

Greg Kelley can make this team better, whether there is a season or not. He isn’t going to help the team by starting at OLB.

 

His story, what he went through, leading the team through a “life isn’t always fair, but suck it up and take control of what you can can control” mentality is what he brings to a team. His work ethic, his fight, his humbleness, his professionalism, etc... are what a team needs in and off season.  Give him a locker, give him #49 or some other shitty number and get him positively influencing the team.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

I feel like you can’t even put a value on how much his presence would mean to our locker room. For everything you just described. Plus, by all accounts, he seems like a really good dude. 

[South Austin 52620]

Finally finished the series.  To summarize this thread:

Fuck Chris Dailey.

Fuck Sean Mannix.

Fuck Geoffrey Puryear.

Fuck Patricia Cummings.

Fuck Cody Mitchell.

Fuck Jonathan McCarty.

Shawn Dick rocks.

Keith Hampton fucks.

Hook ‘em, Greg. 🤘

[VolenteHawk 495]

On 7/27/2020 at 8:16 AM, Longhorn said:

Greg Kelley can make this team better, whether there is a season or not. He isn’t going to help the team by starting at OLB.

 

His story, what he went through, leading the team through a “life isn’t always fair, but suck it up and take control of what you can can control” mentality is what he brings to a team. His work ethic, his fight, his humbleness, his professionalism, etc... are what a team needs in and off season.  Give him a locker, give him #49 or some other shitty number and get him positively influencing the team.

Yeah, I’d have went and watched him work out and added him outside the walk on process if you had to. He’s been through actual adversity in life, not “we’re trailing Iowa State with only 8 minutes left” adversity.

[pwinger 35]

On 7/28/2020 at 9:18 PM, South Austin said:

Finally finished the series.  To summarize this thread:

Fuck Chris Dailey.

Fuck Sean Mannix.

Fuck Geoffrey Puryear.

Fuck Patricia Cummings.

Fuck Cody Mitchell.

Fuck Jonathan McCarty.

Shawn Dick rocks.

Keith Hampton fucks.

Hook ‘em, Greg. 🤘

What, no love for the jury?

 

edit: and unfortunately, the Ranger seems like a raging dick

Edited August 2, 2020 by pwinger

[williemackgarza 1826]

What, no love for the jury?
 
edit: and unfortunately, the Ranger seems like a raging dick

What about chompers?

[williemackgarza 1826]

I think gourmand is patricia.

[LTtxfan 49363]

On 7/26/2020 at 10:05 AM, LTtxfan said:

Fyi...

 

 

[Doc Reeves 6434]

Good luck to him. 
 

Even if nothing pans out, it’s important to fight to get your life back. 

[BrazilHorn 6634]

 I really hope he gets a shot to play some place but why would he need to be in transfer portal? He's not playing anywhere currently is he? I thought he was trying to walk on and UT and they said "No" due to Covid?

 

[Steel Shank 9432]

Dang. I really wanted to see him in a Longhorn uniform. Best to him. He's going to be a strong addition to any team.

[TheStoicPaisano 9939]

Full ride to Eastern Michigan.

ESPN Story

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

1 hour ago, TheStoicPaisano said:

Full ride to Eastern Michigan.

ESPN Story

Holy fuck, good for him. Good for Eastern Michigan. That’s awesome 

[mchookem 16397]

good for him! i really hope his life turns out well...but this prompts a question...

is he realistically good enough for the NFL and was/is that actually his ultimate life goal?

because if not, if he just wanted to play some more ball in college b/c his life was interrupted...i would think a degree from UT would be substantially more marketable than one from Eastern Michigan, as far as a career goes. 

regardless, i just hope he finds happiness and peace wherever. 

ETA: i see in the article it sounds like his trainer does feel he's NFL material.

Edited September 19, 2020 by mchookem

[Halohal 503]

Truly happy for him and to see him give it a shot. Hope to see him on Sunday's. Now release that anger and pop some heads.

[LTtxfan 49363]

15 hours ago, mchookem said:

good for him! i really hope his life turns out well...but this prompts a question...  is he realistically good enough for the NFL and was/is that actually his ultimate life goal?

ETA: i see in the article it sounds like his trainer does feel he's NFL material.

Sorry, but the article says " he'll probably play on Saturdays at a big-time program", not that Kelley is NFL material.

[Dennis Taylor 18875]

17 hours ago, mchookem said:

good for him! i really hope his life turns out well...but this prompts a question...

is he realistically good enough for the NFL and was/is that actually his ultimate life goal?

because if not, if he just wanted to play some more ball in college b/c his life was interrupted...i would think a degree from UT would be substantially more marketable than one from Eastern Michigan, as far as a career goes. 

regardless, i just hope he finds happiness and peace wherever. 

ETA: i see in the article it sounds like his trainer does feel he's NFL material.

He can sell movie rights to his story.  Lord knows Hollywood is out of ideas