Personally the lack of a ruling on the TRO is baffling and I doubt it has anything to do with tonight's game. The whole TRO statute is significantly premised on an immediate situation. You file a TRO because you want a quick ruling. My only take is she is having trouble with it and it is a very close case
TSJ Thread
- Status
Her DNA on him proves nothing regarding a crime.
I agree, but it corroborates more of the situation and might contradict statements by him or witnesses for the defense
texillwek
🔶🔹🔸🔷
To be fair, there was a TON of sht to review in that filing or response - whatever.
theNewGuy
- Dallas, TX
Matt Collins seems like a really fun guy at parties
Mr. Tibbs
- southeast DuPage
IF , his fingers touched her hand or arm , I would think any DNA transfer would be washed away the first time he washed his hands really well afterwards .
But her DNA on him could indeed come from a sneeze . it means ZERO to this case
Mr. Tibbs
- southeast DuPage
that’s exactly what legal staffs are for
IlliniKat91
- Chicago, IL
When I skimmed the Illinois response to TSJ's TRO, it stated that they brought it to their Title IX expert and asked if Title IX applied. It's possible that the process they're discussing in that document. They put the facts up against the test for Title IX (whether it applies) and found that it didn't. They completed the process and the finding wasn't in TSJ's favor
I have been wondering about this too. It doesn’t seem to be “expedient” at this point based on the judges remarks last Friday.
texillwek
🔶🔹🔸🔷
You're right!
I assume a ruling on this will set a precedent since this NIL landscape is still very much taking shape so maybe just taking closer care? I’m no lawyer or justice so this is simply just a thought with zero background to back it up.
So soon? What an f'd up situation. I know it's commonplace in these cases, but this is so unfortunate for all involved.
Judge asked for a couple days in March but it’s a pain to get the lawyers schedules to match up.
For Criminal Defense attorneys, would guess if they set a date for the prelim hearing TJ isn’t waiving it, meaning it most likely looks like they are going to go forward and try and get it dismissed at prelim hearing stage, correct?
Not sure NIL is in play here but you are correct. As far as due process in a university imposed suspension this case will be looked at for years
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
So odds of charges being dropped are now effectively 0%?
I believe the judge can rule not to move forward with the case at the Feb hearing if the DA doesn’t present sufficient evidence correct?
The judge kept referring to a "no-go" as an option, which I'm assuming is the same as waiving the hearing. And the defense specifically said they wanted a preliminary hearing and that they estimated it would take "half a day."
They are no higher or lower than they were before today.
But those odds always hovered somewhere around 0%.
- Status