Charles Grant (1 Viewer)

[jgb95]

Grant Indicted

Hey any guys out there that can shed some light on this issue.

 

[ADP]

I would say he is in some trouble.....

Bobby McCray is looking real good right now.

 

[Chachi]

McCray owner here!

 

[SproutDaddy]

I just don't see this holding up in court.

 

[bcr8f]

McCray owner here!

This makes you happy? Everyone was charged? Are they trying to get some of these guys t turn on others? I doubt this gets far as well.

 

[jgb95]

i was thinking the same thing

 

[msommer]

They can't all be defending themselves so someone has had to have thrown the first punch (we can be pretty sure that Grant did not stab himself in the neck...). Maybe that is why they are all being charged

 

[Afro Samurai]

These charges seem very iffy. I bet in the end he never even has to show up in court.

 

[Bri]

The only way I see to rationalize this is that they probably didn't release everything to the press. The information we've been given, it doesn't "add up".

 

[bcr8f]

The only way I see to rationalize this is that they probably didn't release everything to the press. The information we've been given, it doesn't "add up".

It does if they are trying to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. They may be trying to scare people to rat out the real criminals.

 

[Bri]

The only way I see to rationalize this is that they probably didn't release everything to the press. The information we've been given, it doesn't "add up".

It does if they are trying to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. They may be trying to scare people to rat out the real criminals.

That's against the law too.

 

[bcr8f]

The only way I see to rationalize this is that they probably didn't release everything to the press. The information we've been given, it doesn't "add up".

It does if they are trying to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. They may be trying to scare people to rat out the real criminals.

That's against the law too.

What law is it against? There is probably some evidence against all of them.

 

[Bri]

The only way I see to rationalize this is that they probably didn't release everything to the press. The information we've been given, it doesn't "add up".

It does if they are trying to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. They may be trying to scare people to rat out the real criminals.

That's against the law too.

What law is it against? There is probably some evidence against all of them.

well it goes back to my original statement. What we've been given isn't enough info to do anything towards Grant except maybe say wrong place, wrong time, get a better class of friends or somesuch. Tomorrow, you can't be charged with a crime they have no evidence forsometimes(all the time?)there has to be enough for a grand jury to vote that a trial was warranted

 

[corpcow]

The only way I see to rationalize this is that they probably didn't release everything to the press. The information we've been given, it doesn't "add up".

It does if they are trying to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. They may be trying to scare people to rat out the real criminals.

That's against the law too.

What law is it against? There is probably some evidence against all of them.

well it goes back to my original statement. What we've been given isn't enough info to do anything towards Grant except maybe say wrong place, wrong time, get a better class of friends or somesuch. Tomorrow, you can't be charged with a crime they have no evidence forsometimes(all the time?)there has to be enough for a grand jury to vote that a trial was warranted

Obviously... that's what indicted means - that they had enough evidence to move forward with the charges and bring to trial. The burden of proof is obviously a lot less than "reasonable doubt" - but there is some burden. And of course, as it said in the article, "Grant ... was charged by an Early County grand jury that also charged Laquient Macklin with felony murder and feticide in the shooting death of Korynda Reed".