From: chloupek@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Re: NC vs Hunt (Marine Gay Bashing in Wilmington NC) verdict
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics
Lines: 57

In article <1qp5juINNgu5@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>, wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:
> In article <1993Apr14.135948.3024@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu>, 
> tfarrell@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Thomas Farrell) said:
> 
>> A good case? A F**KING GOOD CASE? The defense lawyer asked the victim
>> questions like "what kind of sexual perversions do you participate
>> in?"  and you think he made a good case?????
> 
> Speaking as someone who's only about six weeks and a $6,900 tuition bill
> away from becoming an unemployed slob with a law degree, I'd really like
> to see a transcript of this trial.  I'd especially like to know what
> happened immediately after the defense attorney asked that question
> (assuming that the reports that he did so are accurate... I'm not
> accusing Tom Farrell of making anything up, but this _is_ the sort of
> case that spawns garbled misquotes, false rumors and urban legends like
> tribbles).  It'd be nice to think that the prosecutor objected
> (irrelevant, prejudicial, inflammatory... take your pick) and that the
> judge upheld the objection.
>
I did hear this question asked during a radio news update of the case.  (They
were talking about the ongoing trial and had some audio clips).  Immediately
after the defense attorney asked the question, there was an "Objection!" heard
in the background.  The clip ended at that point so I don't know if the
objection was upheld.  I can't imagine NC is *that* bad. 

>> The arresting officer said the bastards told him they did it on
>> purpose and hoped the victim would die, and you think the defense made
>> a good case????? No wonder we're losing!  We're aparently not trying
>> to win!
> 
> Again, I'd like to see the transcript... I'd read the latter bit of that
> in the news media (the arresting officer testifying that one of the
> defendants calmly asked him about the condition of the "homo" and said
> that he hoped he'd die) but this is the first I've heard of the officer
> testifying that one of the defendants actually said that he did anything
> at all, let alone that he did it on purpose.
>
This I didn't hear as an audio clip but heard it reported a number of times on
news stories both during and after the trial.  Now the "we did it on purpose"
thing is stretching, I think it was something more like--he had it coming.  If
somebody else remebers better than I on this second point, feel free to
clarify.  
        
Frank

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frank R. Chloupek 
CHLOUPEK@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu 
Department of Physics -- *The* Ohio State University
(Not just any Ohio State University) 

"There is only one hard-and-fast rule about the place to have a party:  
somebody else's place."
							--P.J. O'Rourke


