Toggle sidebar

BREAKING NEWS DEC 8TH Rodney Anderson passes 3 hour polygraph test about rape accusations

O

OUSOONER67

New member
Mar 23, 2004
22,474
49,183
0
 
  • Like
Reactions: bullmarket, Halfa100, veritas59 and 1 other person
R

roygbell

New member
Feb 11, 2011
3,361
339
0
Lie detector tests don't mean all that much. It makes for good propaganda for trial lawyers to help DAs decide whether to file charges, but the results can't be used as evidence in an Oklahoma criminal court. I don't think we should jump to any conclusions until the Norman police complete their investigation and provide the results to the DA. It shouldn't take to long after that for the DA to file or not file charges. I bet we will know by next Thursday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlimShiny and CTOkie
B

bullmarket

New member
May 29, 2001
450,365
1,039
0
roygbell said:
Lie detector tests don't mean all that much. It makes for good propaganda for trial lawyers to help DAs decide whether to file charges, but the results can't be used as evidence in an Oklahoma criminal court. I don't think we should jump to any conclusions until the Norman police complete their investigation and provide the results to the DA. It shouldn't take to long after that for the DA to file or not file charges. I bet we will know by next Thursday

I differ. For a case with no physical evidence, a polygraph test by a very respected administrator a former guy with the FBI who has done over 3500 polygraph tests, this means a helluva lot. No charges will ever be filed by the DA as all of the evidence favors Rodney Anderson & there is no physical evidence.
The only evidence that the girl has offered is that after two weeks the girl said she had a "vision recalling images" when she was talking to a friend that she was raped. There is no physical evidence ...absolutely none.
Rodney has copies of texted messages on his phone where after the incident the girl wanted Rodney to be her boy friend in which he said no. .It was two weeks later when the girl wanted a VPO.
She apparently never filed a police report until after the two weeks had passed.
All 3 OKC TV stations featured this new story of the polygraph test tonight and channel 5 KOCO-TV had a complete written copy of the text of the polygraph test that they showed tonight with all of the questions of the test that Rodney had answered.

At the conclusion of the 3 hour polygraph test it "showed no deception in all of the answers
by Rodney Anderson" according to the polygraph test administrator.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: PtLavacaSooner
S

soonerinlOUisiana

New member
May 29, 2004
37,579
26,765
0
roygbell said:
Lie detector tests don't mean all that much. It makes for good propaganda for trial lawyers to help DAs decide whether to file charges, but the results can't be used as evidence in an Oklahoma criminal court. I don't think we should jump to any conclusions until the Norman police complete their investigation and provide the results to the DA. It shouldn't take to long after that for the DA to file or not file charges. I bet we will know by next Thursday.
Click to expand...
Actually, due process under the United States Constitution REQUIRES us to jump to a conclusion/presumption --- that the man is completely innocent until a jury determines guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The polygraph only reinforces that conclusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PtLavacaSooner, iasooner1, Medic007 and 3 others
J

jdou73

New member
Sep 23, 2007
11
25
0
I seriously doubt Petitioner will show up for Dec 18 hearing. Too much unfavorable evidence against her blurred “recollection” to support a permanent protective order. She may not want to be subjected to vigorous cross examination and negative media attention.

Projection - case dismissed; followed by announcement by DA - no charges to be filed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Senior Sooner, soonerfastnloud and Medic007
B

bullmarket

New member
May 29, 2001
450,365
1,039
0
YourCrimsonNightmare said:
Polygraphs are inadmissable in court. They are political tools, nothing more.
Click to expand...

We know that my old friend but this case will never go to court & the DA will not file any charges. There is no physical evidence....none. The big key is to convince the OU administration David Boren Joe C and Lincoln Riley that Rodney is innocent, They will make the decision if Rodney will play in the College playoffs.
 
J

jdou73

New member
Sep 23, 2007
11
25
0
The standard for a Protective Order is whether the Petitioner is in eminent danger of physical harm or mental harassment by the Respondent. The multiple post-event texts weigh against “mental” harassment. Knowing where she resides without any evidence of “stalking” or physical abuse would be insufficient for “physical” harm. The “recollection” remembered from a night of heavy alcohol consumption would weigh heavily on its creditibity. The lie detection test would never be admitted or mentioned in court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Senior Sooner and Medic007
M

Medic007

New member
Sep 25, 2006
39,775
55,111
0
jdou73 said:
The standard for a Protective Order is whether the Petitioner is in eminent danger of physical harm or mental harassment by the Respondent. The multiple post-event texts weigh against “mental” harassment. Knowing where she resides without any evidence of “stalking” or physical abuse would be insufficient for “physical” harm. The “recollection” remembered from a night of heavy alcohol consumption would weigh heavily on its creditibity. The lie detection test would never be admitted or mentioned in court.
Click to expand...
I think either you've done some real lawyering or you've seen every episode of Matlock and Judge Judy at least a dozen times.

:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Senior Sooner and iasooner1
B

bullmarket

New member
May 29, 2001
450,365
1,039
0
jdou73 said:
The standard for a Protective Order is whether the Petitioner is in eminent danger of physical harm or mental harassment by the Respondent. The multiple post-event texts weigh against “mental” harassment. Knowing where she resides without any evidence of “stalking” or physical abuse would be insufficient for “physical” harm. The “recollection” remembered from a night of heavy alcohol consumption would weigh heavily on its creditibity. The lie detection test would never be admitted or mentioned in court.
Click to expand...

jdou73......Does the JD in your board name stand for Juris Doctor (Lawyer) and you graduated from OU law School in 1973?

I went to OCU's law school for a while until I got my current profession.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Senior Sooner, Medic007 and iasooner1
B

bullmarket

New member
May 29, 2001
450,365
1,039
0
jdou73 said:
I seriously doubt Petitioner will show up for Dec 18 hearing. Too much unfavorable evidence against her blurred “recollection” to support a permanent protective order. She may not want to be subjected to vigorous cross examination and negative media attention.

Projection - case dismissed; followed by announcement by DA - no charges to be filed.
Click to expand...

I hope you are 100% correct my friend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iasooner1 and Senior Sooner
J

jdou73

New member
Sep 23, 2007
11
25
0
jdou73 said:
I seriously doubt Petitioner will show up for Dec 18 hearing. Too much unfavorable evidence against her blurred “recollection” to support a permanent protective order. She may not want to be subjected to vigorous cross examination and negative media attention.

Projection - case dismissed; followed by announcement by DA - no charges to be filed.
Click to expand...

one down; one to go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007, Senior Sooner and iasooner1
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom