If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Mistrial declared when assault victim's prosthetic eye pops out on the witness stand. Judge calls it an "unforeseen" event   (usatoday.com) divider line 62
    More: Amusing, witness stand, glass eyes, Mistrial declared, trials  
•       •       •

6412 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Feb 2013 at 4:11 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



62 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-07 12:44:36 AM
I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?
 
2013-02-07 12:55:08 AM

mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?


Because he's hardly the prosecution's star pupil.

*crickets chirp*

See, it's an eye joke.

*wolves howl*

'k, then, bye.

*tumbleweeds rustle*
 
2013-02-07 01:00:31 AM
WHAT?
 
2013-02-07 01:06:51 AM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?

Because he's hardly the prosecution's star pupil.

*crickets chirp*

See, it's an eye joke.

*wolves howl*

'k, then, bye.

*tumbleweeds rustle*


Well, I guess in a way it makes sense. Perhaps they were very worried about infection. They certainly wouldn't want him to die early. Better to dilate.

*crickets*

*scattered groans*
 
2013-02-07 01:28:46 AM
Maybe the judge thought it was an intentional stunt.
 
2013-02-07 01:37:45 AM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?

Because he's hardly the prosecution's star pupil.

*crickets chirp*

See, it's an eye joke.

*wolves howl*

'k, then, bye.

*tumbleweeds rustle*


I don't see what you did there
 
2013-02-07 01:48:52 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?

Because he's hardly the prosecution's star pupil.

*crickets chirp*

See, it's an eye joke.

*wolves howl*

'k, then, bye.

*tumbleweeds rustle*

I don't see what you did there


Eye do.
 
2013-02-07 01:51:01 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?

Because he's hardly the prosecution's star pupil.

*crickets chirp*

See, it's an eye joke.

*wolves howl*

'k, then, bye.

*tumbleweeds rustle*

I don't see what you did there


*rattle(snake) noise*

We don't expect you to be learned about what we mean, city-slicker.

That thar's a clue, by the way,
 
2013-02-07 01:52:31 AM
Knows his pain:

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-02-07 01:59:22 AM

Sid_6.7: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?

Because he's hardly the prosecution's star pupil.

*crickets chirp*

See, it's an eye joke.

*wolves howl*

'k, then, bye.

*tumbleweeds rustle*

I don't see what you did there

*rattle(snake) noise*

We don't expect you to be learned about what we mean, city-slicker.

That thar's a clue, by the way,


Just when I thought this couldn't get any cornea....
 
2013-02-07 02:11:27 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Just when I thought this couldn't get any cornea....


Indeed. There certainly is a lot of vitreous humor in this thread. :-/
 
2013-02-07 02:16:31 AM
Iris there were a video of said incident.
 
2013-02-07 04:15:43 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Sid_6.7: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?

Because he's hardly the prosecution's star pupil.

*crickets chirp*

See, it's an eye joke.

*wolves howl*

'k, then, bye.

*tumbleweeds rustle*

I don't see what you did there

*rattle(snake) noise*

We don't expect you to be learned about what we mean, city-slicker.

That thar's a clue, by the way,

Just when I thought this couldn't get any cornea....


Y'all are all quiet hum-iris
 
2013-02-07 04:18:31 AM
Was the witness named Garret?

/I loved that game,,,
 
2013-02-07 04:20:02 AM
Maybe the judge is just keeping an eye out for emotional ploys.
 
2013-02-07 04:20:39 AM
There wolf.  There castle.

/Wrong 'eye' jokes?
 
2013-02-07 04:22:00 AM

mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?


The only plausible reasoning I could come up with is the judge had a golf game to get to because the story on it's own doesn't make any sense.
 
2013-02-07 04:26:06 AM
The judge spun it right round out of court.
 
2013-02-07 04:28:37 AM
Peeper shenanigans!
 
2013-02-07 04:29:51 AM

mamoru: I'm clueless about court proceedings; why is this considered a mistrial?


It's just a bit too dramatic for courtroom decorum.  Accident or not, he's afraid that the sight of his eye falling out on stand would unfairly override reason for the facts of the case.
 
2013-02-07 04:30:14 AM
FTFA: Suddenly, the $3,000 prosthetic blue eye popped out. Huttick caught it and cried out as two jurors gasped and started to rise.

"I couldn't believe it just came out," Huttick said.


I'm calling shennanigans on Mr. Huttick. Unless he had a really poor fitting, those things just don't come popping out, especially at such a convenient time as in his testimony in front of a jury.

My late Uncle Ralph had a glass eye from childhood and it never "popped out" unexpectedly. In fact, even his wife had never seen it out of its socket in the thirty some years they were married.

Yeah, Huttick made it pop out as part of his testimony, for added effect.
 
2013-02-07 04:31:42 AM
Coming soon to Law and Order: ICU
 
2013-02-07 04:33:26 AM
He did it for the eyefect.
 
2013-02-07 05:18:49 AM

LowbrowDeluxe: There wolf.  There castle.

/Wrong 'eye' jokes?


DAMN YOUR EYES!!!

Too late!
 
2013-02-07 05:20:35 AM
You know what's funny? Mark Wahlberg took out some Asian dude's eye a few decades ago.

Never really paid for his crime.
 
2013-02-07 05:40:16 AM

Aulus: FTFA: Suddenly, the $3,000 prosthetic blue eye popped out. Huttick caught it and cried out as two jurors gasped and started to rise.

"I couldn't believe it just came out," Huttick said.

I'm calling shennanigans on Mr. Huttick. Unless he had a really poor fitting, those things just don't come popping out, especially at such a convenient time as in his testimony in front of a jury.

My late Uncle Ralph had a glass eye from childhood and it never "popped out" unexpectedly. In fact, even his wife had never seen it out of its socket in the thirty some years they were married.

Yeah, Huttick made it pop out as part of his testimony, for added effect.


To be fair, maybe the eye wasn't a proper fit.

/at least that's what I see
//he might not though.
 
2013-02-07 05:55:59 AM

sexorcisst: Coming soon to Law and Order: ICU


Socket to them!
 
2013-02-07 06:00:14 AM
Obviously staged.  No-one actually cries an eye out.  He should get 20 lashes...maybe 10.
 
2013-02-07 06:39:06 AM
Just another case of blind justice.
 
2013-02-07 06:42:11 AM

People_are_Idiots: Aulus: FTFA: Suddenly, the $3,000 prosthetic blue eye popped out. Huttick caught it and cried out as two jurors gasped and started to rise.

"I couldn't believe it just came out," Huttick said.

I'm calling shennanigans on Mr. Huttick. Unless he had a really poor fitting, those things just don't come popping out, especially at such a convenient time as in his testimony in front of a jury.

My late Uncle Ralph had a glass eye from childhood and it never "popped out" unexpectedly. In fact, even his wife had never seen it out of its socket in the thirty some years they were married.

Yeah, Huttick made it pop out as part of his testimony, for added effect.

To be fair, maybe the eye wasn't a proper fit.

/at least that's what I see
//he might not though.


Considering it was new, and he'd lost his job, it's quite possible it wasn't a great one.  Cheap prosthetics rarely are.
 
2013-02-07 07:02:13 AM
A mistrial seems a bit much. Couldnt the judge have just rolled his eye at him and move on?
 
2013-02-07 07:40:26 AM
Was watching on local news.  The guy testifying was very upset and crying during his testimony.  I think his crying is what probably did it during his emotional testimony.  The judge saw two of the jurors jump up when the eye popped out so that's why he said there was no way they could have a "fair" trial after see the jurors reaction.
 
2013-02-07 07:43:05 AM
They couldn't resume the trial, they'd lost focus.
 
2013-02-07 07:49:49 AM
This kind of headline just lens itself to obscure jokes .
 
2013-02-07 07:51:17 AM

FullMetalPanda: Was watching on local news.  The guy testifying was very upset and crying during his testimony.  I think his crying is what probably did it during his emotional testimony.  The judge saw two of the jurors jump up when the eye popped out so that's why he said there was no way they could have a "fair" trial after see the jurors reaction.


It seem like something like this should be considered legitimate evidence.  Otherwise, it's akin to having a lawsuit for a burn victim and making the victim testify from under a burka.  The eye falling out is a very real part of what they guy's dealing with.

I hope the guy who did this to someone who was just trying to break up a fight winds up being his slave for life.
 
2013-02-07 07:51:35 AM
The victim wasn't perchance a Sailor was he?
 
2013-02-07 08:09:12 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: FullMetalPanda: Was watching on local news.  The guy testifying was very upset and crying during his testimony.  I think his crying is what probably did it during his emotional testimony.  The judge saw two of the jurors jump up when the eye popped out so that's why he said there was no way they could have a "fair" trial after see the jurors reaction.

It seem like something like this should be considered legitimate evidence.  Otherwise, it's akin to having a lawsuit for a burn victim and making the victim testify from under a burka.  The eye falling out is a very real part of what they guy's dealing with.

I hope the guy who did this to someone who was just trying to break up a fight winds up being his slave for life.


Despite being relevant, the evidence was too prejudicial. Some things are so shocking that you can't ask the jury nicely to just forget about it when they go back in to the jury room.  Cost of mistrial < cost of appeal by guilty defendant b/c "OMG the jury saw the eyeball!"
 
2013-02-07 08:11:28 AM
He couldn't perceive the depth of the situation.
 
2013-02-07 08:16:35 AM
Was there no other eye-witness?
 
2013-02-07 08:34:17 AM

Rufus Lee King: EngineerBob: The victim wasn't perchance a Sailor was he?


;)
Rolling my eyes at that...
 
2013-02-07 08:39:23 AM

another cultural observer: BraveNewCheneyWorld: FullMetalPanda: Was watching on local news.  The guy testifying was very upset and crying during his testimony.  I think his crying is what probably did it during his emotional testimony.  The judge saw two of the jurors jump up when the eye popped out so that's why he said there was no way they could have a "fair" trial after see the jurors reaction.

It seem like something like this should be considered legitimate evidence.  Otherwise, it's akin to having a lawsuit for a burn victim and making the victim testify from under a burka.  The eye falling out is a very real part of what they guy's dealing with.

I hope the guy who did this to someone who was just trying to break up a fight winds up being his slave for life.

Despite being relevant, the evidence was too prejudicial. Some things are so shocking that you can't ask the jury nicely to just forget about it when they go back in to the jury room.  Cost of mistrial < cost of appeal by guilty defendant b/c "OMG the jury saw the eyeball!"


The odd thing is that the evidence seems to otherwise include his medical records and/or testimony that he lost his eye, since that's the only way to establish the aggressor used a key or other weapon as opposed to just his fist.  It's a bit surprising for a judge to say the visceral act of the fake eye popping out was too prejudicial.  That said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and whatnot.
 
2013-02-07 08:41:47 AM
Don't this make your brown eyes blue?
 
2013-02-07 08:55:03 AM
I can undertand why a judge might, but this does seem a little extreme  *reads TFA*  This was the VICTIM, and the testimony was over the loss of his eye in a fight?  Oh hell no, this is absolutely a mistrial!  I thought it was just a regular witness at first.  Yeah, this is so insanely prejudicial that there's no way to avoid a new trial.

Rufus Lee King: Seriously, though, a mistrial? Sounds like stinking-ass lawyer tricks to me.

Or, stinking ass-lawyer; either one works.


Entirely possible, prosecutors will frequently try to get the worst image possible into a jury's head to ensure a conviction.  Sometimes it's just the nastiest, most brutal view of the murder scene, other times it's a picture of a supposedly innocent victim (like a small child or pretty white girl) looking as angelic and serene as Photoshop can make them, and sometimes it's stuff like this.  It's a basic part of framing the case, the prosecutor just went way too far on this one.  Or maybe it was the victim acting alone, who knows?  Either way, the same result is needed.  Glad the judge realized it.
 
2013-02-07 08:58:13 AM
Eye scream, you scream, we all scream for...eye scream footage? O_o

(Also agreed that glass eyes tend not to pop out like that, though--being custom prosthetics pretty much designed to stay in.)
 
2013-02-07 09:01:34 AM
That is a slam dunk winning move and he's a fool to not do it at the next trial as well. Perhaps a bit less dramatized this time. Poor guy, the eye is new. He needs more time to practice his popping.
 
2013-02-07 09:11:17 AM
I thought "crying your eyes out" was just an expression.
 
2013-02-07 09:35:57 AM

mattharvest: another cultural observer: BraveNewCheneyWorld: FullMetalPanda: Was watching on local news.  The guy testifying was very upset and crying during his testimony.  I think his crying is what probably did it during his emotional testimony.  The judge saw two of the jurors jump up when the eye popped out so that's why he said there was no way they could have a "fair" trial after see the jurors reaction.

It seem like something like this should be considered legitimate evidence.  Otherwise, it's akin to having a lawsuit for a burn victim and making the victim testify from under a burka.  The eye falling out is a very real part of what they guy's dealing with.

I hope the guy who did this to someone who was just trying to break up a fight winds up being his slave for life.

Despite being relevant, the evidence was too prejudicial. Some things are so shocking that you can't ask the jury nicely to just forget about it when they go back in to the jury room.  Cost of mistrial < cost of appeal by guilty defendant b/c "OMG the jury saw the eyeball!"

The odd thing is that the evidence seems to otherwise include his medical records and/or testimony that he lost his eye, since that's the only way to establish the aggressor used a key or other weapon as opposed to just his fist.  It's a bit surprising for a judge to say the visceral act of the fake eye popping out was too prejudicial.  That said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and whatnot.


I agree with you, to a certain extent.  However...would you agree that wheeling the mangled body of the murder victim into the courtroom would be too prejudicial in a murder trial, even though the jury will see pics of the corpse?
 
2013-02-07 09:59:37 AM
d3qcduphvv2yxi.cloudfront.net

HA HA!....Prosthetic Eye......ball.
 
2013-02-07 10:01:03 AM
Ban assault victims!
 
2013-02-07 10:04:27 AM
He wasn't crying because of the fight, he was just thinking about how he'll never be able to watch the next Transfomers movie in 3D.
 
Displayed 50 of 62 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report