NoPa

[thehawk]

With Joe dying, does this mean his previous testimony is thrown out? If so, would imagine the previous AD, president and police would just say that Joe never told them anything and walk?

As we've said in the SBox, his grand jury testimony is out (it was out anyway, since there was no cross), but this makes McQueary the principal witness.

I'll hang up and wait to hear from a real lawyer.

You should keep waiting, but I think that JoPa's testimony could be use to impeach a parties testimony.  So it cant be used as evidence that he told the President or AD in and of itself, but it could be brought in if either the President or AD claimed that JoPa never told them.

[Gilgamesh]

With Joe dying, does this mean his previous testimony is thrown out? If so, would imagine the previous AD, president and police would just say that Joe never told them anything and walk?

As we've said in the SBox, his grand jury testimony is out (it was out anyway, since there was no cross), but this makes McQueary the principal witness.

I'll hang up and wait to hear from a real lawyer.

You should keep waiting, but I think that JoPa's testimony could be use to impeach a parties testimony.  So it cant be used as evidence that he told the President or AD in and of itself, but it could be brought in if either the President or AD claimed that JoPa never told them.

The more I read and think about rule 804, I'm sure the State could make an argument to the judge that Paterno's testimony was against his interest and therefore, should be admissible.  Plus, the catchall of rule 807 could save the State, provided they have no other means to prove the facts against the AD and President.

Edit: PA doesn't have the residual exception.

[Bort]

With Joe dying, does this mean his previous testimony is thrown out? If so, would imagine the previous AD, president and police would just say that Joe never told them anything and walk?

As we've said in the SBox, his grand jury testimony is out (it was out anyway, since there was no cross), but this makes McQueary the principal witness.

I'll hang up and wait to hear from a real lawyer.

You should keep waiting, but I think that JoPa's testimony could be use to impeach a parties testimony.  So it cant be used as evidence that he told the President or AD in and of itself, but it could be brought in if either the President or AD claimed that JoPa never told them.

The more I read and think about rule 804, I'm sure the State could make an argument to the judge that Paterno's testimony was against his interest and therefore, should be admissible.  Plus, the catchall of rule 807 could save the State, provided they have no other means to prove the facts against the AD and President.

Edit: PA doesn't have the residual exception.

Quiet Gil. The lawyers are talking.

[BH]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/jerry-sandusky-ill-never-forget-all-the-things-joe,27169/

[Tonker]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/jerry-sandusky-ill-never-forget-all-the-things-joe,27169/

That is absolutely outfuckingstanding.