I'm actually a lawyer and I can say with 100% positivity that Anthony will be raped in jail

It's not rape if he cums.

Will that cause a mudslide? Are there any meteorologist's here?

P A R A L L E L // T H I N K I N G

You must be confused... Gavin said the entire case was dropped a few weeks ago and everyone on the TACS sub did their "I told you so!!!" victory lap. They must be bringing Ant in to apologize to him again.

The whore's been paid off so she won't show up. Likely it'll all be dismissed.

She doesn't need to show up. It's the state vs Anthony. They already have her testimony and the evidence they collected. A lot of domestic violence cases occur where the victim doesn't testify in court.

No, that's incorrect.

You don't know what you are talking about. Dani only needs to be involved if she files a civil case. That would be Dani vs Ant. This isn't Dani vs Ant. This is the state vs Ant.

No, that's incorrect. She has to be present to be cross examined. It's called the Confrontation Clause to the Constitution.

[deleted]

Lol, why did you delete this?

No she doesn't. Domestic violence victims often don't testify in court. Rape victims don't either. People also often give testimony on tape rather than in the court. Dani doesn't have to show up to be cross examined. Even if she did go to court she doesn't have to take the stand unless she wants to and the state thinks that'll help their case.

It's completely wrong, and you're embarrassing yourself.

It's not completely wrong. The state can subpoena her to testify if she is the only witness to the event and they are relying on her testimony. Since the event was partially on periscope they may not need her on the stand.

http://www.greghillassociates.com/will-the-da-dismiss-the-case-if-the-victim-will-not-testify.html

Edit: and I deleted it because I changed my mind about continuing this argument.

Sounds crazy, but she's necessary to testify that he caused her pain w/o consent. Video may come in if different witness can authenticate it, which could be tricky. And unless NY adopted "forfeiture by wrongdoing," she's gotta be served & show up or get scooped on material witness warrant. Easy to see why these kinds of cases frequently don't go to trial.

Lol, you linked to a California attorney's website to try to explain a New York situation.

You deleted it because you realized how stupid and wrong you are by doing a 10 second google search.

You are complete fail. Just off yourself.

P A R A L L E L // T H I N K I N G