Kenton Co. Investigates Chris Henry After Thurman's DUI

[BengalszoneBilly]

Legally speaking, it only takes one reliable witness to prove anything.

And legally speaking, only an idiot looks for "reliable" witnesses inside a drinking establishment. Then again, we are talking about law enforcement here.

Without an actual blood acohol/piss/breath test, this is an unprovable aspect.

Game, set, and match to PMThor.

[ohwhyknott]

I prefer the night time drama that is more fitting:

DYNASTY !!!

WHODEY !!!

I'm just glad you did'nt say Dallas!

[Kazkal]

QUOTE(PMThor @ Sep 26 2006, 08:49 PM) *

Without an actual blood acohol/piss/breath test, this is an unprovable aspect.

Game, set, and match to PMThor.

People better stop hating on henry and wish best for em other wise carsons gonna have to bitch slap someone.

[Stripes]

People better stop hating on henry and wish best for em other wise carsons gonna have to bitch slap someone.

Yeah, Pittsburgh tried to f**k with Carson's receivers, and he f**ked them up.

[Kazkal]

If you're correct, it'll be pretty tough for Henry to weasel out of jail time this time. Good to have K-dub.

How so if it only matters if his probation came from the gun charges and had nothing to do with booze? like he said it should only matter if acholol is envolved on the case that gave the probation no?

[membengal]

At some point, though, this does smack of a witch hunt. Kenton County, perhaps, might have more pressing matters to worry about?

[bengalboomer7]

hearsay--Unverified information heard or received from another; rumor.

Law. Evidence based on the reports of others rather than the personal knowledge of a witness and therefore generally not admissible as testimony.

Hmmm. Well Henry was drinking something.

Can you, or anyone else prove it was an alcoholic beverage, and not just a coke or the like?

So say they go to the bartender. Henry ordered drinks. Does that mean he actually consumed them? Not necessarily.

Without an actual blood acohol/piss/breath test, this is an unprovable aspect. I bet the attorneys don't even go ahead with it anyway.

Now, go look up gullible in the dictionary. This is the judicial system we're talking about. Proving this would be so easy. Lady witnesses henry tried to flirt with, the waitress, bartender, and any customer. This is bad, and the only way Cris henry isn't getting in trouble if teh famous/athlete leninancy applies

[PMThor]

hearsay--Unverified information heard or received from another; rumor.

Law. Evidence based on the reports of others rather than the personal knowledge of a witness and therefore generally not admissible as testimony.

Hmmm. Well Henry was drinking something.

Can you, or anyone else prove it was an alcoholic beverage, and not just a coke or the like?

So say they go to the bartender. Henry ordered drinks. Does that mean he actually consumed them? Not necessarily.

Without an actual blood acohol/piss/breath test, this is an unprovable aspect. I bet the attorneys don't even go ahead with it anyway.

Now, go look up gullible in the dictionary. This is the judicial system we're talking about. Proving this would be so easy. Lady witnesses henry tried to flirt with, the waitress, bartender, and any customer. This is bad, and the only way Cris henry isn't getting in trouble if teh famous/athlete leninancy applies

Nope. They can say they saw him drinking all they want, but were those witnesses drinking themselves? How do they know who Henry is? What is their relationship to him? They cannot prove that he was drinking. They can say that he was drinking alcohol, but there is no proof.

It is true that this is all up to the judge and his perception on the matter, but no judge would put a person in jail for any extended period of time on the simple word of someone else who allegedly saw him breaking his probation. This is not going to happen.

Hey people can say that I was driving over 100 MPH on 75, weaving in and out of traffic, but the cops actually have to see me doing it in order for me to get arrested. Same with many, many other crimes.

[derekshank]

A judge ordered Henry to stay away from alcohol when he bonded out on a drug charge.

"It's contemptuous, which means in Kentucky, you go to jail for six months. It may be a violation of a condition of bond, which means you could go to jail up to a year. It may just be civil revocation, where the judge simply orders him or puts some new conditions on him," Easterling said.

It seems to me that if a judge didn't put him in jail earlier, he's not going to jail for this. All the paper-trail can prove is that he bought drinks for his friends. Unless his waitress specifically remembers watching him drink what he ordered, he won't go to jail. My guess... he'll get a more strict probation, and we'll move on.

He should already be in jail right now. My opinion won't change on that... but if he didn't go to jail for waving a gun around, or for being caught with weed, or for supplying alcohol to minors, he's not going to jail for being at a bar, even if it was a violation of his probation.

On the one hand... I think jail-time would do Henry some good, and if I were a judge that was really interested in helping him as a human being, I would have already given him some time. On the other hand... if the judicial system is going to keep letting him get off with a slap on the wrist, I'll certainly allow him to play WR for my team.

[SkinneymulleT]

Judges are allowed to consider hearsay evidence on admistrative issues such as this but the only standard they may use for refusal to grant his release is if he is a flight risk and/or danger to self or community. Judge may be able to recind the bond as its terms were violated but this would likely place CH temp in custody until a new bond hearing but he may face charges from charges stemming from this. Not likely to be placed in jail on contempt charges as this is extreme measure. Iam back in law school?

[bengalboomer7]

I'm gonna assume that most of you haven't ever been in a court proceeding. The judge can do whatever the f**k he wants

[sparky151]

The judge has enormous discretion. The case will only come before him if prosecutors bring it. Occasionally a court can take the initiative but normally they don't act sua sponte. If the prosecutor brings Henry back to court, he'll probably have a witness or two and perhaps a receipt. That's plenty to revoke Henry's probation. Probation isn't a right, it's the court cutting someone some slack on the promise that they'll stay out of trouble.

If the judge feels like Henry has publicly embarrassed the court, he can change the terms, perhaps require Henry to overnight in the jail with work release for practice and games. The bottom line is that people crying about "proof" are too late. Henry has already plead guilty and now has a burden on him to reassure the court he isn't screwing up.

[derekshank]

If the judge feels like Henry has publicly embarrassed the court, he can change the terms, perhaps require Henry to overnight in the jail with work release for practice and games.

That to me seems like a best-case scenario. I would love that. It would be good for Bengal fans to get to see him continue to play for us... and it would be damn good for him. As a human-being understanding that his life is more important than football, I thought he should have been put in jail to begin with. It would do him some good... so having the best of both worlds would make me pretty happy.

That said... how would that work for playing games on the road?

[PMThor]

I'm gonna assume that most of you haven't ever been in a court proceeding. The judge can do whatever the f**k he wants

Yes I have been in court, testifying officially in a murder case no less.

Yes, a judge can do whatever he wants. But he won't be a judge for long if they don't follow precedent concerning such a trivial matter as a possible probation violation.