staged an accident, blamed other (innocent) driver, lied in court under oath, pretended to be hurt

Street Guardian USA

Well-Known Member
Retailer
Joined
May 14, 2013
Messages
11,976
Reaction score
8,442
Location
Oakland Park, Florida (USA)
Country
United States
Dash Cam
StreetGuardian.CAM Amazon.com
Last edited:
Bhooo... She needs medical attension! Shrinks should have been provided for her long ago, but now?...? She deserves everything she gets,!
 
They should send her to jail.
 
I'm not buying the story.
Written or documentary evidence - disclosure
Any relevant written or documentary evidence in the form of reports, photos or witness statements will normally be provided to the other side before the hearing. The time for providing this evidence will usually be ordered by the court. The process in which each party is required to make any relevant documents it has in its possession available to the other party is called "disclosure".
In certain circumstances, you can also compel non-parties to provide all documents relevant to the proceedings by issuing a Notice of Non-Party Disclosure.
 
What a disgusting person.

Dashcams sure are awesome :)
 
I'm not buying the story.
Written or documentary evidence - disclosure
Any relevant written or documentary evidence in the form of reports, photos or witness statements will normally be provided to the other side before the hearing. The time for providing this evidence will usually be ordered by the court. The process in which each party is required to make any relevant documents it has in its possession available to the other party is called "disclosure".
In certain circumstances, you can also compel non-parties to provide all documents relevant to the proceedings by issuing a Notice of Non-Party Disclosure.

Spoken like true litigious lawyer speak.............. I'll stick with the line of I have video and it does not lie.
 
I'm not buying the story.
Written or documentary evidence - disclosure
Any relevant written or documentary evidence in the form of reports, photos or witness statements will normally be provided to the other side before the hearing. The time for providing this evidence will usually be ordered by the court. The process in which each party is required to make any relevant documents it has in its possession available to the other party is called "disclosure".
In certain circumstances, you can also compel non-parties to provide all documents relevant to the proceedings by issuing a Notice of Non-Party Disclosure.
I really cannot see why ANY innocent person/insurance company would allow any of this to go the distance this claims to have gone.
Having been on the end of some nutjob's lies & having video evidence of my innocence, my insurance company simply gave the other insurance company a couple of chances to ask their guy for the true version of events. He lied both times. My insurance then, I guess, hit the other company with "well, have a gander at this video clip - it seems to tell a completely different version of events..."
My car was repaired straight away, the other guy's car was sat under a tarp on his driveway for many months.
I cannot see how this would've panned out any differently.
 
"My wife thinks nothing should happen to her niece because the dashcam video was not disclosed until after she testified under oath, so the court entrapped her into committing a crime she would have not committed otherwise."

Jeez, the twisted mindset of some people.

As discussed on that page it's an impeachment thing, they only have to reveal the video after she lied because of what they used it for - to prove that she had lied.
Which sounds good to me.
 
they only have to reveal the video after she lied because of what they used it for - to prove that she had lied.
Which sounds good to me.
I cannot understand why they allowed her to continue with her lies to the point where it went through the courts & compo was awarded etc.
Why did insurance simply not say "we know your client is lying and we can prove it, now ask her again..." This charade went way, way, way beyond what could be reasonably expected and a lot of very expensive lawyers, judges etc would've spent many days arguing over this.
If I were a judge, I'd be just as pissed at the insurance who kept the footage hidden all that time & impose some sort of fine on them for withholding vital evidence.
 
After reading the clarifications further down in the comments it's clear that all laws and judicial procedures were properly followed. There were two cases going on at the same time and it was the second civil case which had just been filed that provides the knock-out punch against the girl, for that steps it up from simple perjury to fraud and a host of other crimes too :eek: The girl is obviously too stupid to be allowed in any decent society and her Aunt isn't too far behind for defending her niece when it is so clear what has happened. Nor do I think too much of Aunt's Hubby who posted this; I'd have filed for divorce already- I don't want anyone as dimwitted as wifey and her family to have any part in my life.

I hope the DA and the Judge who handle the girl's trial go with all the firepower they can muster and line up the numerous sentences consecutively without chance of parole. It's definitely called for here.

Phil
 
Why the video's not in discovery is covered in the comments by a couple of different lawyer-types.

From reading the original poster's comments I get the feeling that the video was not from the other party's vehicle. Quite possible it wasn't even available to anyone until after trials were underway.
 
Last edited:
lawyers have private school tuition, car payments, mortgage etc

I have none of those and own everything I need or want............ There is the difference.
 
Back
Top