Sep 10, 2012 | Child Accidents, Pedestrian Accidents, Personal Injury, Uncategorized, Wrongful Death
A mother and resident of Columbia S.C., has just been sentenced to 10 years in prison due to unlawful conduct toward her currently missing toddler/child. Judge Knox made his decision this past Friday for Zinah Jennings, after much contemplation and scrutinization of photos of the missing toddler, Amir Jennings and his left behind belongings. Knox’ punishment was to sentence the mother to 10 years in prison for “unlawful conduct towards a child.”
It took the jury only about 2.5 hours to reach their decision and find the mother negligent and guilty of the crime at large. It is stated that Zinah appeared to be emotionless as the jury handed in their verdict. Ironically, Zinah actually gave birth to her second child on the 6th day of the jury trial, and the fact-finders still found her guilty. Her attorney has taken the stance that no decision for an appeal will be made until he and his client discuss the options for the new child, the mother, and the alike.
Amir and Zinah Jennings were reported missing in early December by Zinah’s mother, Jocelyn Jennings, after Zinah had been involved in a single vehicle car accident in Columbia; however Amir was not stated to be with his mother at the time of the incident. Since then, Zinah has refused to tell the police where her son is, and is only reported to of said, “he is in a safe place.”
This statement has left everyone confused, as the police conducted a massive search from Atlanta, GA to Charlotte, NC in efforts to locate the missing toddler. Such investigation included reviews of cell phone records, an actual manhunt in Northern Richland, and calling on 41 witnesses discussing how Zinah treated Amir. Insomuch, it was reported by the witnesses that Zinah had been spotted kicking her son, squeezing him until he cried, and letting him wander in and out of a bank unsupervised, at less than 2 years of age.
The defense tried to rebut these statements with contrary witnesses whom states they had seen Amir “clean and happy on numerous occasions.” In fact, on Consignment store owner stated that she saw Zinah and Amir shopping in his store the week before Christmas. However, this statement was contrary to the police reports that state that the child was last seen on November 29. The defense also attempted to claim that Zinah was both pregnant and mentally ill during trial and before. However Knox did not buy this defense, as seen by the judgment.
As for the father of Amir, he is asking that Zinah Jennings be given the “maximum punishment.”
The South Carolina Child Accident Attorneys of Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower, LLP
If the unthinkable happens in yours or your child’s life, call the experienced accident attorneys of Reeves, Aiken & Hightower LLP. With offices in Columbia and throughout South Carolina, our child injury attorneys maintain a statewide practice. Our seasoned litigators have over 75 years combined trial experience. Our team of personal injury attorneys include former insurance defense lawyers, a former Registered Nurse (RN), and former criminal prosecutor. We can investigate all aspects of a serious accident and hold all parties accountable for your loss. Call us today and speak directly with one of our lawyers at 704-499-9000 or 877-374-5999 toll free. We have offices in Charlotte and throughout South Carolina. We’re here to help.
Sep 10, 2012 | Personal Injury, Premises Liability, Trucking/Tractor-Trailer Accidents, Uncategorized, Workers' Compensation, Wrongful Death
Last Saturday was grim when a Chester County man was crushed to death while on the job. Isiah McCrorey, age 51, was in charge of operating the cranes for Palmetto Recycling in Rock Hill.
His daughter, Nydia Wherry, is confused by the accident states that her father ” knew those cranes, he’d been working with cranes and working construction for over 20 years,” when the accident occurred; leaving the family baffled and full of questions. Specifically, McCrorey had been working this particular crane at Rock Hill’s Palmetto Recycling for over 2 years.
According to the Rock Hill police report, McCrorey was operating the crane last Saturday when he noticed something was in the way of the crane. He subsequently locked the crane and got out of the equipment in order to move something out-of-the-way. It was at that moment that the one-ton storage container that the crane was holding fell atop McCrorey. Co-workers ran to his rescue and tried to lift the container off of McCrorey as they called 911.
Currently, OSHA is investigating the accident to see if Palmetto Recycling could have done something different to prevent the accident.McCrorey’s daughter Wherry states that her family is not pointing fingers to place blame, however they have obtained counsel to look into the incident.
The victim has left behind his wife of 28 years, along with children and grandchildren to bear the grief.
Rock Hill Work-Related Accident Attorneys
If you or a loved one have been injured or killed in any work-related accident, call the offices of Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower, LLP to help get you the justice you and your family deserve. Call us at 877-374-5999, or use this form, to speak with an attorney who can help you evaluate your claim and get you the best possible recovery. Hire the best work-related accident attorneys in whom you are the most confident will get the job done right! WIth over 75 years of combined experience, Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower, LLP is ready to get you the compensation you deserve.
Sep 6, 2012 | Brain Injury/Head Trauma, Car Accidents, DUI & DWI, Personal Injury, Trucking/Tractor-Trailer Accidents, Uncategorized
Four individuals riding in a Cadillac on Wednesday afternoon on Skyline Road were taken to the hospital for non-life threatening injuries after the car hit a moving freight train.
Crews responded to the scene after receiving calls about a train and car collision. When officials arrived, the four people who were in the car were standing outside of the car walking around. They were able to speak and respond to teams.
The Car’s passengers were headed toward Highway 72 when they stopped before the tracks as a Northfolk Southern Train Passed by. The car then inched forward, striking the side of the train. Although the train and its occupants suffered no damage, the Cadillac was practically destroyed by the collision.
Officials have not yet confirmed if alcohol or drugs were contributing factors to the accident.
Rock Hill Train Accident Attorneys
The seasoned trial attorneys of Reeves, Aiken & Hightower LLP have over 75 years combined legal experience and have represented victims of drunk driver accidents in Rock Hill, Fort Mill, Lake Wylie, Clover, and Columbia. These are complex injury cases with both civil and criminal considerations. Our team of lawyers include former insurance defense attorneys, a former Registered Nurse (RN), and a former York County DUI prosecutor. Together, they will use their talents and backgrounds to hold those responsible accountable and make sure you and your family are protected. Compare our lawyers’ credentials to any other law firm. Then hire the best drunk driver accident lawyer who you trust to fight for your case. Whether it is planes, trains or automobiles, we can help! Call us today at 803-548-4444 or 877-374-5999 toll free for a private consultation.
Sep 6, 2012 | Car Accidents, Child Accidents, Personal Injury, Uncategorized, Wrongful Death
A 17-month-old boy walked into the path of a car traveling on Loraine Lane in Lancaster County and was killed, according to the S.C. Highway Patrol.
The incident occurred Thursday evening around 5:45 p.m. in a residential community north of S.C. 9, situated approximately two miles west of Buford, S.C.
Troopers say the child was struck by the woman’s 2004 Kia van and was later pronounced dead. No charges have yet been filed in this case.
Lancaster Accident Attorneys
If you or a loved one have been involved in an accident that resulted in personal injury ir death, please contact the experienced accident attorneys of Reeves, Aiken & Hightower LLP. Our seasoned trial lawyers are able to help those individual injured in South Carolina and North Carolina. With over 75 years combined legal experience, former insurance defense backgrounds, and a former Registered Nurse (RN), our team is standing by to help get you and your family through this difficult time. For more information, please visit our website at www.rjrlaw.com. Compare our attorneys’ credentials. Then, call us for a private consultation about your particular situation and let us get you the jelp you and your family deserve!
Jul 31, 2012 | Criminal Defense, Uncategorized
The South Carolina Court of Appeals revisited a three common criminal issues in the recent case State v. Mitchell. In this interesting case involving charges of first-degree burglary, possession of burglary tools, and petit larcency, Mitchell allegedly broke into a house. There were no eye-witnesses, and the only evidence linking Mitchell to the scene was (oddly) footage from a deer camera (you know, like you put by deer corn, for hunting) that the victim homeowner had installed on top of the refrigerator out of fear of burglars, showing the face and body of the person who broke into the house. Before trial Mitchell argued that:
- The photos from the deer camera was inadmissible under rules 1001, 1002, and 1003 SCRE. The photos were not original, and the photos had a shady chain of custody, couldn’t be read by police computers, and came not directly from the camera, but from a disk on to which it was copied by victim homeowner’s computer.
- The police officer’s lay testimony identifying the person in the photos as the defendant, Mitchell, should be inadmissible under rules 403 and 701 SCRE.
The trial court did not allow either of these motions in limine or during the trial. Mitchell moved for a post-trial motion for a new trial. The trial court denied. Mitchell appealed on all issues, but abandoned, perhaps accidentally, the chain of custody issue.
Police Officer’s Testimony Identifying Defendant in the Photos
The part of this ruling that may most affect future defendants is the court’s endorsement of allowing police officers to give lay testimony identifying a defendant in photos. The relevant rules:
Rule 701, SCRE: If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness’ testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which (a) are rationally based on the perception of the witness, (b) are helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’ testimony or the determination of a fact in issue, and (c) do not require special knowledge, skill, experience or training.
Rule 704, SCRE: Testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact.
Rule 403, SCRE: Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.
The ruling is not altogether surprising, but when photos are grainy and unclear, a police officer’s relatively uninformed, and often biased, opinion as to who is in the photos could mean the difference between a guilty and not guilty verdict. Generally, allowing witnesses to identify individuals in photos and videos is justified by the increased knowledge of a person’s appearance, but no such justification is available for this case. For this reason, one expects that a judge concerned about the lack of identifying evidence (given that the video is of poor quality, that the police officer has no special knowledge of the appearance of the defendant, and the jury should be as capable of identifying the person in the video as the police officer) might rule that the evidence is excludable under Rule 403, since the police officer’s authority may prejudice the issue more than actually prove the issue.
Authentication of the Disk Containing the Photos from the Deer Camera
Since the court did not really examine the chain of custody problem, and the standard of review (abuse of discretion), the court’s position on the issue boils down to a straightforward reading and application of the rule: “If data are stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an ‘original’.” The originals were admitted because they were merely print-outs of computer data that was copied from the victim’s camera to the victim’s computer to the victim’s disk given to the police. Since the proper foundation was laid as to the disk, they were admissible under this standard of review.
Motion for New Trial
Mitchell contended that since the jury found him not guilty of petit larcency an element of first-degree burglary, intent to steal, was not met.
The court recites that the standard for granting a new trial relies on an abuse of discretion, which the South Carolina Supreme Court has held to mean that no new trial will be granted by an appellate court unless no competent evidence supports the conviction.
Mitchell’s contention that the petit larceny verdict was inconsistent with the first-degree burglary verdict was bound to fail because the South Carolina Supreme Court abandoned the inconsistent verdict theory in State v. Alexander, 303 S.C. 377, 383, 401 S.E.2d 146, 150 (1991).
The Criminal Defense Attorneys of Reeves, Aiken & Hightower
If you or someone you know has been charged with any crime, call the experienced South Carolina criminal defense attorneys of Reeves, Aiken & Hightower at 877-374-5999, or use this form, for a free consultation with an attorney. We’ll help you evaluate your options and develop your best defense to get you the best results possible.
