TexasCHLforum.com

esxmarkc wrote:I'm afraid that iPads/iPhones are gonna make your average juror a "GoogleLawyer"

Looks like Mr. Lemes get's another chance to rethink his strategy and maybe his legal team. From what I'm reading sounds like his defense team ain't all that great.

I haven't been on jury duty for years; but the last time I was, they prohibited jurors from having laptops, cell phones, or any electronics in court.

Usually the judge instructs the jurors at the beginning of the case not to discuss it, read about it in the news. watch TV coverage, or do independent research.

I'm afraid this guy got the best lawyers he could afford, which is kind of like buying a used bulletproof vest.

- Jim

Maybe the DA will do the right thing and let it go.

Bart wrote:Maybe the DA will do the right thing and let it go.

Well...going off only the information presented in this thread...I think the DA *is* doing the right thing by pursuing this. Maybe his adrenaline got the better of him, but it doesn't sound to me like there was any harm, burglary, or intent to commit either. Mistakes all around, in my opinion, and it's very sad someone lost their life over it.

Once again I find myself very appreciative of this Forum as a place to converse and, sometimes, respectfully disagree with no intention to persuade others.

TexDotCom wrote:

Bart wrote:Maybe the DA will do the right thing and let it go.

Well...going off only the information presented in this thread...I think the DA *is* doing the right thing by pursuing this. Maybe his adrenaline got the better of him, but it doesn't sound to me like there was any harm, burglary, or intent to commit either. Mistakes all around, in my opinion, and it's very sad someone lost their life over it.

Once again I find myself very appreciative of this Forum as a place to converse and, sometimes, respectfully disagree with no intention to persuade others.

while I dont know that I have really picked a side yet on this issue,

the question I will ask you is, if you woke up at 2 am and I was in the living room, would you take the time to ask me if I intended you any harm?

its possible it was a drunken mistake the kid went in the wrong house. and its sad that he lost his life if thats really what happend. but you cant excuse his actions because he was drunk, he broke into the house and got killed for it.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_ ... 051054.php

More in-depth stuff now out.

They forensics show that the only horizontal bullet wound was in his back indicating that he was shot in the back first then 4 more times in the front as he was collapsing.

Strange also that it was a 1 man - 11 woman jury. Weird stats there for sure. IN any case, the defense must have thought their case was poor considering it was the defense that jumped on the jury being tainted and requested a mistrial.

Back to trial it goes......

or the defense didn't want their newly acquired fame and fortune to end so quickly!

esxmarkc wrote:More in-depth stuff now out.

He's nothing more than a cornered rat,” Joe James Sawyer told the jury. “He's going to get caught. He won't be going to football practice. He's going to the pen.”

This is the defendant's brother testifying? I wonder who called him as a witness.

WildBill wrote:

esxmarkc wrote:More in-depth stuff now out.

He's nothing more than a cornered rat,” Joe James Sawyer told the jury. “He's going to get caught. He won't be going to football practice. He's going to the pen.”

This is the defendant's brother testifying? I wonder who called him as a witness.

The defense team was two brothers. That was one of his defense attorney's closing statements. Kinda poor sentence structure on the part of the writer.

That may be worse of couse... He paid that guy $400/hr to call him a cornered rat. My brother would call me one for free.

esxmarkc wrote:

WildBill wrote:

esxmarkc wrote:More in-depth stuff now out.

He's nothing more than a cornered rat,” Joe James Sawyer told the jury. “He's going to get caught. He won't be going to football practice. He's going to the pen.”

This is the defendant's brother testifying? I wonder who called him as a witness.

The defense team was two brothers. That was one of his defense attorney's closing statements. Kinda poor sentence structure on the part of the writer.
That may be worse of couse... He paid that guy $400/hr to call him a cornered rat. My brother would call me one for free.

Thanks, I didn't catch that. Two for the price of one.

esxmarkc wrote:http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_ ... 051054.php

More in-depth stuff now out.

They forensics show that the only horizontal bullet wound was in his back indicating that he was shot in the back first then 4 more times in the front as he was collapsing.

Strange also that it was a 1 man - 11 woman jury. Weird stats there for sure. IN any case, the defense must have thought their case was poor considering it was the defense that jumped on the jury being tainted and requested a mistrial.

Back to trial it goes......

that definitly changes your perspective, if his first shot was in the back then its more likely he went out of his house and shot some one running away from him then some one who came towards him from the bushes

zero4o3 wrote:you cant excuse his actions because he was drunk

If someone drives drunk they don't get a free pass because they were drunk.

DoubleJ wrote:or the defense didn't want their newly acquired fame and fortune to end so quickly!

A quick search shows Michael J Sawyer (atty San Antonio) as a General Practice Lawyer.
Why would Lemes hire a General Practice atty? I would not hire my Family Practice doctor
to perform heart surgery. I would hire the best heart specialist I could afford. Same with
criminal charges, hire a specialist, a Board Certified Criminal Defense Trial lawyer.
So, maybe it's true. You get what you pay for...?
If my info is incorrect. Someone please steer me in the right direction. Thanks.

gemini wrote:

DoubleJ wrote:or the defense didn't want their newly acquired fame and fortune to end so quickly!

A quick search shows Michael J Sawyer (atty San Antonio) as a General Practice Lawyer.
Why would Lemes hire a General Practice atty? I would not hire my Family Practice doctor
to perform heart surgery. I would hire the best heart specialist I could afford. Same with
criminal charges, hire a specialist, a Board Certified Criminal Defense Trial lawyer.
So, maybe it's true. You get what you pay for...?
If my info is incorrect. Someone please steer me in the right direction. Thanks.

The Texas State Bar lists both Michael J. Sawyer and Joe James Sawyer's practice areas as "Criminal". Both have been lawyers since the 1970s. Neither is a Board Certified Specialist. According to the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, only 10% of the lawyers in Texas are certified specialists. Hiring a certified specialist doesn't mean that you are getting a better attorney.

http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm ... tID=229815" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm ... tID=185758" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.tbls.org/WhyChooseBoardCertified.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The "cornered rat" statement was the defense attorney's characterization of the deceased intruder.

I think he was trying to say that the man was desperate not to get caught and be arrested for burglary.

I doubt the man had that much intellectual capacity at that point. All he had to do was run. Few shooters can hit a running man at any distance with a handgun.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:The "cornered rat" statement was the defense attorney's characterization of the deceased intruder.

I think he was trying to say that the man was desperate not to get caught and be arrested for burglary.

I doubt the man had that much intellectual capacity at that point. All he had to do was run. Few shooters can hit a running man at any distance with a handgun.

- Jim

I was not at the trial so I am playing google-lawyer-juror. If the jury had any sympathy for the deceased, which I think they did, this statement could seem very cruel and callous to a jury. If the defendant thought that the deceased was a cornered rat or vermin needing to be exterminated, then the shooter would be the cruel and callous executor.