Probably not the best idea to beat the shit out of the guy, but I agree with you. That man had it coming. It should be dismissed and I am sure someone can find grounds for dismissal.

Yeah, I can't agree that beating the guy up was the right way to go about it, but it is most definitely what I would have done.

had someone listened to lynch and his little brother, and taken them seriously when they complained, this ass whipping lindner took may have been diverted. he has some big balls to not accept a plea bargain and tho it's risky, he's dead right. so yeah, it wasn't right to whip an elder's (meaning age-wise) ass, but i understand and hope for his vindication.

I would've strangled the fucker to death with his own cock if he interfered with my family.

Dirty bastard...

Quote:It should be dismissed and I am sure someone can find grounds for dismissal.

Is the accused really rich? If so,he's in with a chance,if not, he's fucked. I guess he could plead temporary insanity,which would give a jury an excuse to acquit him.

He only needs one juror to see things his way.

"Mr.Lynch, could you please tell the court why you decided to brutally assault an old man who had spent his years selflessly serving the Church?"
"Yes sir, he fucked my little brother."
"AH-HA! Guilty!"

Really?

(June 19, 2012 at 8:15 pm)Minimalist Wrote: He only needs one juror to see things his way.

In Australia, majority verdicts are accepted in most criminal trials. I understand that in the US,less than a unanimous verdict will result a mistrial, but not an acquittal.

Correct. Then the prosecutor has to decide if he thinks he can do better next time.