Shocking Story on Everson/Satterfield Trial

Section136 said:
I think we are going to be looking at an acquittal. For Satterfield being a prosecution witness, he did not help them at all.
Click to expand...

The prosecution was even trying to discredit, or as the defendants attorney said, 'disavow' themselves from Satterfield's testimony.

Sounds like the prosecution has made some critical errors.
 
Xerxes said:
I found it interesting that Everson had Daniels stand outside the door were the incident took place.

There are many reasons to have Daniels stand outside that room. None of which are good.

No reason to ask a buddy to stand outside the door of a room that can be locked when two college athletes are hooking up.

If someone was going to be doing things in which they didn't want to be caught doing, well that would require someone to stand outside and make sure nobody tries to get in or have knowledge that the female is in fact in the room.
Click to expand...

he didn't stand there the whole time, just long enough for everson to go in and then give Daniels the 'all clear' sign - the thumbs up. Daniels wasn't standing there the whole time the sex was going on.
 
DuffMan said:
I don't think anyone is suggesting that it is enough to convict. What they are saying is it's tough to imagine she is making this up when you look at the other facts of the case.

Does anyone else find it odd that Pierre Pierce was nearly universally despised by Iowa fans for doing something very similar to what these guys are accused of doing, and yet there isn't the same outrage here?
Click to expand...

I have a tough time knowing who to believe. The woman, although likely mostly truthful in her testimony, can't remember most of what happened, and didn't know Everson was involved until weeks later, making her unreliable. Satterfield has a pretty good motivation to lie, making him even more unreliable. Meanwhile, I'm guessing Everson won't testify.

I'm not sure if there's a scenario out there that paints Everson as looking particularly good or morally innocent in the grand scheme of things. However, I also would struggle as a juror to give him 25 years in jail given the prosecution's case.
 
Hawksel said:
I have a tough time knowing who to believe. The woman, although likely mostly truthful in her testimony, can't remember most of what happened, and didn't know Everson was involved until weeks later, making her unreliable. Satterfield has a pretty good motivation to lie, making him even more unreliable. Meanwhile, I'm guessing Everson won't testify.

I'm not sure if there's a scenario out there that paints Everson as looking particularly good or morally innocent in the grand scheme of things. However, I also would struggle as a juror to give him 25 years in jail given the prosecution's case.
Click to expand...

What is Satterfield's motivation to lie at this point? That would only get him in more trouble. He's bed it made with his plea, no?

Also, agree with your last assessment on the 25 years in jail - if i'm going to pull that switch, the evidence must be crystal clear.
 
The defense has really done a good job of providing reasonable doubt. The prosecution has done very little to prove its case in my opinion.
 
GravyJones said:
The defense has really done a good job of providing reasonable doubt. The prosecution has done very little to prove its case in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Maybe the prosecution always knew their case was fairly weak, which was why they offered Satterfield a deal, hoping he would give them more against Everson, which it appears that he did not do. Still worth taking to a trial to see what happens, though.
 
okeefe4prez said:
Rape shield law will likely preclude defense from raising this issue at all. If she says she was a virgin, she was a virgin for purposes of the trial.

I missed that Pugh said she was still awake that someone pointed out above. This is going to be a hard case to prove and is going to come down to who the jurors think is more credible. This he said-she said stuff happens at colleges all the time. If I have a daughter, can anyone recommend an all girls college that won't allow men near the campus after 6 PM?
Click to expand...

St. Mary's College in South Bend is pretty strict about keeping the Notre Dame boys locked out of the compound.
 
imported_ankle23 said:
he didn't stand there the whole time, just long enough for everson to go in and then give Daniels the 'all clear' sign - the thumbs up. Daniels wasn't standing there the whole time the sex was going on.
Click to expand...

I hear you. But it still is strange to me. Why would you ask someone to come with you and stand out the door for any length of time? It could very well be me, but this strikes me as very odd.

Normal humans, on their way to hook up with a willing female, don't ask a friend to hang outside the door until they give the "thumbs up" that its okay for their buddy to leave.

And quite frankly, normal humans, upon being asked to stand outside a door in which their buddy is having relations with a female, wouldn't accept the request.

Very odd for Everson to ask, very odd that Daniels did so.

The one thing that keeps me wondering is that there is no good reason for Daniels to be outside that door. So was he there for a bad reason?
 
I thought Abe's testimony was for the defense the way it ended up. He has nothing to lose by telling the truth, unless he is helping cover for Everson.

The way this trial is going, I don't think there will be any convictions.
 
Xerxes said:
I hear you. But it still is strange to me. Why would you ask someone to come with you and stand out the door for any length of time? It could very well be me, but this strikes me as very odd.

Normal humans, on their way to hook up with a willing female, don't ask a friend to hang outside the door until they give the "thumbs up" that its okay for their buddy to leave.

And quite frankly, normal humans, upon being asked to stand outside a door in which their buddy is having relations with a female, wouldn't accept the request.

Very odd for Everson to ask, very odd that Daniels did so.

The one thing that keeps me wondering is that there is no good reason for Daniels to be outside that door. So was he there for a bad reason?
Click to expand...

Keep in mind you're talking about 18 year olds. It's rare for them to be "normal" humans.
 
So today, the judge throws out the possibility of charging Everson with 2nd degree sexual abuse....instead they are changing the charges to 3rd degree sexual abuse.


The defense has also rested without presenting any witnesses. Closing arguments will be coming shortly.
 
Xerxes said:
I hear you. But it still is strange to me. Why would you ask someone to come with you and stand out the door for any length of time? It could very well be me, but this strikes me as very odd.

Normal humans, on their way to hook up with a willing female, don't ask a friend to hang outside the door until they give the "thumbs up" that its okay for their buddy to leave.

And quite frankly, normal humans, upon being asked to stand outside a door in which their buddy is having relations with a female, wouldn't accept the request.

Very odd for Everson to ask, very odd that Daniels did so.

The one thing that keeps me wondering is that there is no good reason for Daniels to be outside that door. So was he there for a bad reason?
Click to expand...

Who knows. Might be something very simple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top