How mum's selfie saved man from 99-year prison sentence

[Graham2001]

Spotted this story and found it interesting for various reasons, while it is nice to see that the law worked in this case, one cannot help but had been a case at a University, the exculpatory evidence would have been ignored entirely.

A man has managed to avoid 99 years in jail thanks to a selfie taken by his mum.


Christopher Precopia, 21, was arrested in September 2017 for allegedly breaking into his ex-girlfriend’s home, attacking her with a box cutter and carving an X onto her chest, KVUE reports.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/mums-selfie-saved-man-99-year-prison-sentence-034336875.html

 

[cullennz]

Spotted this story and found it interesting for various reasons, while it is nice to see that the law worked in this case, one cannot help but had been a case at a University, the exculpatory evidence would have been ignored entirely.


https://au.news.yahoo.com/mums-selfie-saved-man-99-year-prison-sentence-034336875.html

Freaky

The first thing I thought when I saw the headline was how do they know when the photo was taken, but it explains they check data time stamps

“The photo was posted to Facebook but what we examined was the actual photo that was taken and the data that was created when the photo was taken,” he said.

 

[tyr_13]

That this took so long to clear him is a travesty.

Last time I checked, they had not laid charges on the accuser. Is it they believe she should be committed to the care of mental health professionals instead? I would think that would be a call for a judge.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I'd take some of this with a grain of salt. The "saved ... from 99-year-prison sentence", for instance. That's the potential worst-case scenario and highest penalty. He hadn't been found guilty and as we all know American jurisprudence doesn't always go to the extreme sentence. There's no evidence that he has prior felony convictions ( he was applying to the army which would mean he likely hadn't) and he was probably up for 8/10 with possible parole in 3/5.

I'd also take their claim of legal outlays with a grain of salt. A couple of motions and a few consults? You don't wrack up hundreds of thousands in legal bills in a case that's just about a year old. The closing bit of the article sounds like the set-up for their lawsuit or GoFundMe campaign.

The family paid more than A$340,000 in legal fees and Mr Precopia was denied an application with the US Army due to the charges.

It’s not known if they are seeking legal action.

But the pic of her wound? What cop wouldn't notice how carefully it was cut and how shallow it was. It appears there's one long-ish cut northeast to southwest, and then the other part of the X is actually two separate cuts, only she missed by a millimeter on the center to southeast cut. I've seen people slashed with boxcutters and the cuts look much worse than that.

 

[Foolmewunz]

That this took so long to clear him is a travesty.

The prosecutor says the defense had the pic and hadn't offered up in defense, yet. He also says that once they could verify, they dropped the charges.

A year is not an excessively long time in the US criminal courts/prosecutorial system.

Last time I checked, they had not laid charges on the accuser. Is it they believe she should be committed to the care of mental health professionals instead? I would think that would be a call for a judge.

As I said, it looks to me like they're planning to sue, but who they're suing I couldn't say. And I don't think you "don't arrest" because someone's a little crazy. You charge 'em and let them claim mental incapacitation or whatever. She clearly filed a false charge and I'm going with "no other perp"; she did that to herself.

 

[cullennz]

But the pic of her wound? What cop wouldn't notice how carefully it was cut and how shallow it was. It appears there's one long-ish cut northeast to southwest, and then the other part of the X is actually two separate cuts, only she missed by a millimeter on the center to southeast cut. I've seen people slashed with boxcutters and the cuts look much worse than that.

I had image download blocker on and didn't see that.

That is actually quite laughable.

There is zero chance of that cut being done that nicely by one assailant.

You would have to have at least (and I mean at least) one other person holding someone down and keeping them still to make it that tidy and shallow to make that a real story

 

[Stacko]

As I said, it looks to me like they're planning to sue, but who they're suing I couldn't say. And I don't think you "don't arrest" because someone's a little crazy. You charge 'em and let them claim mental incapacitation or whatever. She clearly filed a false charge and I'm going with "no other perp"; she did that to herself.

Why do I have feeling there's a Mike Nifong wannabe at the core of this travesty. The DA or ADA probably knew this was BS but pushed for it anyway because getting the conviction is more valuable in an election than being forced to scapegoat someone for filing an accusation determined to be false. There's too little downside for overzealous prosecutorial abuse.

 

[bluesjnr]

What happened at the initial investigation?

"Where were you on X at X?"

"At a hotel with my mother attending a skin care symposium?"

"Can you prove that alibi?"

"Yes.......... look at this."

 

[Shadowdweller]

What happened at the initial investigation?

"Where were you on X at X?"

"At a hotel with my mother attending a skin care symposium?"

"Can you prove that alibi?"

"Yes.......... look at this."

Heavens forfend there were otherwise actual witnesses to be found...

Those dastardly universities ignore everything like this all the time, I'm sure Even in Australia.

 

[3point14]

Why do I have feeling there's a Mike Nifong wannabe at the core of this travesty. The DA or ADA probably knew this was BS but pushed for it anyway because getting the conviction is more valuable in an election than being forced to scapegoat someone for filing an accusation determined to be false. There's too little downside for overzealous prosecutorial abuse.

Is the prosecutor elected?

 

[Brainster]

Color me just a little skeptical about this detail in the story:

The family paid more than A$340,000 in legal fees and Mr Precopia was denied an application with the US Army due to the charges.

That's about a quarter of a million US. For a case that is that open and shut? Unless the family is really rich, that seems absurd. What's the first thing a defendant should try to find? An alibi. I think we can take it for granted that the cops didn't wait a long time to arrest him. So wasn't like they were asking him "Where were you on some Tuesday in 2013," it was "Where were you last night?"

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Color me just a little skeptical about this detail in the story:



That's about a quarter of a million US. For a case that is that open and shut? Unless the family is really rich, that seems absurd. What's the first thing a defendant should try to find? An alibi. I think we can take it for granted that the cops didn't wait a long time to arrest him. So wasn't like they were asking him "Where were you on some Tuesday in 2013," it was "Where were you last night?"

Whoa! That's twice in one year I agree with you.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Whoa! That's twice in one year I agree with you.

Naaah! I just think he's learned to follow my lead.

 

[CORed]

Is the prosecutor elected?

In most of the US, yes.

ETA: In most US states, crimes under state law are prosecuted by the District Attorney or County Attorney's office. In most, if not all states, this is an elected position. Actual litigation in most cases is handled by attorneys hired by the District Attorney, though the actual elected official may prosecute high profile cases himself (or herself).

 

[CORed]

I'd take some of this with a grain of salt. The "saved ... from 99-year-prison sentence", for instance. That's the potential worst-case scenario and highest penalty. He hadn't been found guilty and as we all know American jurisprudence doesn't always go to the extreme sentence. There's no evidence that he has prior felony convictions ( he was applying to the army which would mean he likely hadn't) and he was probably up for 8/10 with possible parole in 3/5.

I'd also take their claim of legal outlays with a grain of salt. A couple of motions and a few consults? You don't wrack up hundreds of thousands in legal bills in a case that's just about a year old. The closing bit of the article sounds like the set-up for their lawsuit or GoFundMe campaign.



But the pic of her wound? What cop wouldn't notice how carefully it was cut and how shallow it was. It appears there's one long-ish cut northeast to southwest, and then the other part of the X is actually two separate cuts, only she missed by a millimeter on the center to southeast cut. I've seen people slashed with boxcutters and the cuts look much worse than that.

I've had cat scratches worse than that. I agree that it was most likely self-inflicted.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Color me just a little skeptical about this detail in the story:



That's about a quarter of a million US. For a case that is that open and shut? Unless the family is really rich, that seems absurd. What's the first thing a defendant should try to find? An alibi. I think we can take it for granted that the cops didn't wait a long time to arrest him. So wasn't like they were asking him "Where were you on some Tuesday in 2013," it was "Where were you last night?"

I wonder if the prosecutors were up front with the exact time and date of the attack.

Also, I wouldn't let my large canine be questioned by a cop in the US without an attorney present. Even then, I wouldn't let said pudgy puppy actually answer any of the questions being asked. And cops hate asking questions that they know are not going to be answered. So, the fact that the family had money and hired an attorney may have slowed down the investigation considerably. Which is not a bad thing.

But yeah, that estimated bill does seem a bit much.