TV: HBO's The Night Of

[KesselBuiltMyHotrod]

That was a huge thing in Making a Murderer. Avery's lawyers could only try and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not-guilty; they were not allowed to introduce other suspects or theories into the court proceedings.

I' m not sure if that's a thing for every case or just specific cases, but it's an interesting parallel from TV to real life.

It's up to the judge.

Since they don't seem to really care about how court actually works, they never said anything about it in this show.

 

[Epictetus]

Daune, the limo driver, the other witness, Trevor, etc. were all only mentioned in support of the claim that the detective perhaps did not fully investigate this case properly, overlooking several possible witnesses and their potential place in the bigger puzzle.

None of the defence lawyers (so far), entered evidence pointing to the fact that any of those mentioned names committed the crime. It was more like, ''Maybe reasonable doubt could exist, the detective didn't investigate all possible people, instead he chose to focus solely on one person as a suspect"

None of those names were just thrown in randomly, in my view. Daune was backed up by the claims about Trevor acknowledging that he was not alone that night (whether they verify this with Trevor in court is another story). They showed the security footage of the limo driver. They asked the detective how come he did not interview the other witness (this was the dude in front of the the police car while Naz was inside), and they asked whether or not Trevor raised any suspicion or was just a witness.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

Daune, the limo driver, the other witness, Trevor, etc. were all only mentioned in support of the claim that the detective perhaps did not fully investigate this case properly, overlooking several possible witnesses and their potential place in the bigger puzzle.

None of the defence lawyers (so far), entered evidence pointing to the fact that any of those mentioned names committed the crime. It was more like, ''Maybe reasonable doubt could exist, the detective didn't investigate all possible people, instead he chose to focus solely on one person as a suspect"

None of those names were just thrown in randomly, in my view. Daune was backed up by the claims about Trevor acknowledging that he was not alone that night (whether they verify this with Trevor in court is another story). They showed the security footage of the limo driver. They asked the detective how come he did not interview the other witness (this was the dude in front of the the police car while Naz was inside), and they asked whether or not Trevor raised any suspicion or was just a witness.

I agree with the bold, but I wouldn't think a judge/DA would just allow you to throw out random names of people who should be questioned without showing support as to who they are or why they should be questioned. To the jury/court, Daune is a random name as their is no evidence that he even exists since Box didn't question him and was never aware of him. Daune is backed up by Trevors claim to John, but without presenting that claim (Trevor testifying) they could just pull up anyone with a rap sheet in the area and suggest that they had walked by that night.

 

[Peasy]

If Nas did do it, he stabbed the girl 22 times, and there was blood all over the room yet there wasn't really any on him. Why havent they brought that up?

 

[Ensane]

I agree with the bold, but I wouldn't think a judge/DA would just allow you to throw out random names of people who should be questioned without showing support as to who they are or why they should be questioned. To the jury/court, Daune is a random name as their is no evidence that he even exists since Box didn't question him and was never aware of him. Daune is backed up by Trevors claim to John, but without presenting that claim (Trevor testifying) they could just pull up anyone with a rap sheet in the area and suggest that they had walked by that night.

It would have been admissible and any objection by the DA would have been overruled because the entire line of questioning (and the entire point of recalling Box to the stand) was the impeach him as a witness and thus throw question into anything he said or did in connection with the investigation. It was brilliantly done.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

It would have been admissible and any objection by the DA would have been overruled because the entire line of questioning (and the entire point of recalling Box to the stand) was the impeach him as a witness and thus throw question into anything he said or did in connection with the investigation. It was brilliantly done.

Even if it in fact admissible, Im certainly not a law expert, I would think the DA would want to let the jury hear that their is no evidence of Read.


Something like "Objection your honor, their is no evidence that this Daune Reed was at the scene."

I keep thinking about what they said in A Few Good Men. "You object once to let the jury hear us say he's not a criminologist.".

 

[ArGarBarGar]

"What about Ronald McDonald? Did you think to get a statement from him? He was at the scene."

 

[RayP]

I think they wrap this thing up with Nas being found innocent, because the evidence or something along those lines..... And that he then winds up killing someone in prison and it doesn't matter, or someone kills him.

 

[Sharpshooter]

If Nas did do it, he stabbed the girl 22 times, and there was blood all over the room yet there wasn't really any on him. Why havent they brought that up?

Good question. It would have been something to ask Box. Although, it could have been rebutted by saying that Nas could have taken a shower, thus leaving no evidence of any blood on him. It may be a line of questioning that could backfire.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

I think they wrap this thing up with Nas being found innocent, because the evidence or something along those lines..... And that he then winds up killing someone in prison and it doesn't matter, or someone kills him.

I definitely think it will be an ending that leaves you conflicted, like you suggest.

I could see him being innocent and we find out he did it, with the drug flashbacks.

 

[Ensane]

Even if it in fact admissible, Im certainly not a law expert, I would think the DA would want to let the jury hear that their is no evidence of Read.


Something like "Objection your honor, their is no evidence that this Daune Reed was at the scene."

I keep thinking about what they said in A Few Good Men. "You object once to let the jury hear us say he's not a criminologist.".

That's a fair point in terms of strategy, although I think Weiss sat on her hands because she knew that Duane Reade did in fact exist, and thus calling it into question would have caused the defense to respond by putting Trevor on the stand, which is the last thing she wanted.

The main objective in the line of questioning was to show that Box didn't even look at any other suspects and didn't exhaust all possible leads, and in turn, is a bad investigator, and everything he does or says is questionable.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

That's a fair point in terms of strategy, although I think Weiss sat on her hands because she knew that Duane Reade did in fact exist, and thus calling it into question would have caused the defense to respond by putting Trevor on the stand, which is the last thing she wanted.

The main objective in the line of questioning was to show that Box didn't even look at any other suspects and didn't exhaust all possible leads, and in turn, is a bad investigator, and everything he does or says is questionable.

Did she though? Had they mentioned him to the DA or Box before? I don't recall.

I agree with you regarding their line of questioning and they did a good job of that with the inhaler.

 

[Ensane]

Did she though? Had they mentioned him to the DA or Box before? I don't recall.

She didn't expressly verify Reade's existence, but she knew from her conversation with Trevor that he wasn't a credible witness and that it was more likely that he did exist and was present at the scene than the defense simply fabricating.

 

[chicagoskycam]

Good question. It would have been something to ask Box. Although, it could have been rebutted by saying that Nas could have taken a shower, thus leaving no evidence of any blood on him. It may be a line of questioning that could backfire.

Was the shower investigated for any recent use or possible blood? This is a huge gaping hole the show completely ignores.

 

[chicagoskycam]

I wish they could have gotten an older and worse sounding prosecutor.

I actually like her, seems like a real DA towards the end of their career instead of some vibrant younger version. Just like Box and Stone, everyone is not quite 100% of what you may expect and that's real life. Even Chandra as the lead and she's so green.

I've never been to court, but it seems the court scenes seem kind of unrealistic. Someone throw out an objection! Chandra did once but it was for something that made no sense.

The prosecutor talking about how that doctor was praising the other one at a testimonial dinner was kind of sad. What a reach. Dude put her in her place.

I thought there were several questions that Chandra could have objected to as far as leading or calling for speculation.

 

[Sharpshooter]

Was the shower investigated for any recent use or possible blood? This is a huge gaping hole the show completely ignores.

I don't believe so. Yes, pretty big hole there. But, it may not have been shown because it may not be relevant for us viewers to know as of yet.

If Nas did it, then maybe we're shown him showering up at a latter stage via flashback.
If Nas didn't do it, then we can assume he just passed out downstairs and never took one.

 

[Ensane]

I thought there were several questions that Chandra could have objected to as far as leading or calling for speculation.

The easy one would have been when Weiss asked Katz if he would have had sex with a large open wound on his hand or if he would have rushed off to the emergency room.

 

[Sharpshooter]

The easy one would have been when Weiss asked Katz if he would have had sex with a large open wound on his hand or if he would have rushed off to the emergency room.

Just out of curiosity, what would have been the objection in your opinion to this question?

 

[Ensane]

Just out of curiosity, what would have been the objection in your opinion to this question?

Relevance

Expert witnesses have a limited scope on what they can opine on. Speculating on the mindset (or worse, what he would have done in X situation) of a deceased victim, is outside that scope.

 

[chicagoskycam]

Just out of curiosity, what would have been the objection in your opinion to this question?

There were a couple more to, I have to watch again. Not that Chandra has to object or maybe it shows how green she is. I just thought there was an opportunity.

Kats can't speculate on what Andrea would do in that situation.

 

[KesselBuiltMyHotrod]

Really the whole idea of Chandra trying the case seems pretty ridiculous. A giant, respected firm wouldn't let a greenhorn try a high-profile case. The media attention alone isn't good for them, and there's too much potential for her to embarrass the firm. They'd either cut and run completely or let some with a modicum of experience run lead.

 

[TheCanasianfrasian]

Lol we got a lot of real lawyers in this thread wow

 

[FLYLine27*]

Naz and his attorney kissing...ummmmmmmmmmmm yea.

 

[Peasy]

Good question. It would have been something to ask Box. Although, it could have been rebutted by saying that Nas could have taken a shower, thus leaving no evidence of any blood on him. It may be a line of questioning that could backfire.

If they said that then ask why was there no blood found in the bathroom (even if he used bleach etc highly unlikely he would clean every inch up, there would still be some in the drain etc). I feel like thats one major defence that the show is not using for some reason... If they say he changed clothes, then how come they havent looked for the other clothes etc?

Edit: just saw someone mentioned this above.

 

[KesselBuiltMyHotrod]

I don't believe so. Yes, pretty big hole there. But, it may not have been shown because it may not be relevant for us viewers to know as of yet.

If Nas did it, then maybe we're shown him showering up at a latter stage via flashback.
If Nas didn't do it, then we can assume he just passed out downstairs and never took one.

If there was blood in the shower it would have come up during the prosecution. Unless the defense is hiding another forensics guy other than Katz, I think the boat sailed on any physical evidence re: the shower during trial.

I'm trying to think if there's any way the chain of custody being broken on Naz's clothes and the knife is brought up, but I think it was just cops there.