BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: LA Times: Key witness in Bryan Stow beating dies unexpectedly

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, August 01, 2011

LA Times: Key witness in Bryan Stow beating dies unexpectedly

Hoo-boy:

A key witness in the beating case of Giants fan Bryan Stow at Dodger Stadium died suddenly, apparently of an allergic food reaction.

According to law enforcement sources familiar with the case, Matthew Lee died Sunday after eating a salad that apparently contained nuts, which caused the allergic reaction. The coroner has not determined a cause of death, however.

Stow and Lee went to the Dodgers’ home opener together with a group of friends.

It’s unclear how this will affect the case against Stow’s alleged attackers, but the sources said Lee was an important witness.

However, officials have said they have physical evidence in addition to the evidence provided by eyewitnesses to the beating.

Los Angeles police detectives said Monday they were trying to find additional Giants fans from the Bay Area who were assaulted by the suspects.

AndrewJ Posted: August 01, 2011 at 10:39 PM | 20 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: dodgers, giants, obituaries

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

1. zachtoma Posted: August 02, 2011 at 01:35 AM (#3890753)

I know this looks bad and people will be all over it with suggestions foul play, and with good reason, but a) he would have had to be poisoned, right? - or his violent allergies would have to be known to anyone who wanted him gone - and b) do two two-bit Riverside County thugs really have the connections/pull to get eyewitnesses offed like that? I haven't heard anything about the gang connections of either, but it seems like a pretty weird way for it to go down. I'd put my money on a very strange, unfortunate, and tragic coincidence in a very sad saga, but wouldn't rule anything out. I mean, the very day the prosecution outlines its case in the bail-reduction hearing... it strains credulity regardless of the circumstances.

2. Mash Wilson Posted: August 02, 2011 at 01:43 AM (#3890778)

Well, I don't know and we'll never know, but that's one hell of a coincidence. Don't think you can blame anyone for wondering if there are gang connections involved here or something.

I wouldn't hesitate to bet on "the defendants will walk or get a light slap on the wrist" after this piece of news, anyhow.

3. Tom Nawrocki Posted: August 02, 2011 at 01:50 AM (#3890786)

Since this falls under the jurisdiction of the LAPD, I feel very confident that Columbo will get to the bottom of it.

4. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 02, 2011 at 01:53 AM (#3890791)

Mob-O-Roni, the San Francisco Treat.

5. bads85 Posted: August 02, 2011 at 02:07 AM (#3890813)

and b) do two two-bit Riverside County thugs really have the connections/pull to get eyewitnesses offed like that?

They are San Bernardino County thugs from Rialto, representing the 909.

6. Morty Causa Posted: August 02, 2011 at 02:24 AM (#3890834)

Reminds me of an old Esquire magazine cartoon: scene is a restaurant; seated at one table is a guy, face down in his plate of soup; at the next table another guy is telling the waiter: "I'll have what he had, except hold the soup."

7. Ray (RDP)

Posted: August 02, 2011 at 02:30 AM (#3890838)

Since this falls under the jurisdiction of the LAPD, I feel very confident that Columbo will get to the bottom of it.

Sadly, that's no longer true as of Falk's passing a few weeks ago.

8. Bruce Markusen Posted: August 02, 2011 at 02:56 AM (#3890850)

I know little about the law, but wouldn't they already have a record of his testimony, either in written form or via a recording?

9. AJM Posted: August 02, 2011 at 03:02 AM (#3890852)

I know little about the law, but wouldn't they already have a record of his testimony, either in written form or via a recording?

There is no chance for him to be cross examined now. A violation of the 6th amendment.

10. Sam M. Posted: August 02, 2011 at 03:05 AM (#3890854)

There is no chance for him to be cross examined now. A violation of the 6th amendment.

They could always call in Madam Ethel Mertzola, medium extraordinaire. Of course, first they'd need a medium to contact the medium . . . .

11. stealfirstbase Posted: August 02, 2011 at 03:34 AM (#3890873)

Man, this is like that witness in the phone hacking scandal dying. Does Rupert Murdoch have an alibi?

Maybe this is a "strangers on a train" situation, where Murdoch takes McCourt's murder, and vice-versa.

Or maybe witnesses dying before the trial is the new legal market inefficiency.

12. BringBackTimTeufel Posted: August 02, 2011 at 03:36 AM (#3890874)

There is no chance for him to be cross examined now. A violation of the 6th amendment.

Unless the prosecution can prove the defendant(s) got rid of the witness. There's an episode of Law and Order based on the Natalee Holloway case that is this exact scenario.

13. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 02, 2011 at 03:42 AM (#3890879)

IANAL, but it strikes me that the rules of evidence and standards of proof on Law and Order differ ever so slightly from those in the real world.

14. Sam M. Posted: August 02, 2011 at 03:45 AM (#3890885)

In cases where they know a witness is going to (or is likely to) die before trial, they can take steps to preserve testimony -- depositions, nowadays usually a video deposition, to be played at trial. But that is for cases where a prospective witness is terminally ill.

Unexpected deaths screw cases up.

15. BringBackTimTeufel Posted: August 02, 2011 at 03:51 AM (#3890889)

IANAL, but it strikes me that the rules of evidence and standards of proof on Law and Order differ ever so slightly from those in the real world.

Well, yea. But I'm getting ready for another year of working on a college campus to begin. Excuse me for the lines of reality being blurred.

16. AJM Posted: August 02, 2011 at 03:58 AM (#3890891)

Unless the prosecution can prove the defendant(s) got rid of the witness.

Of course, if they could prove that the defendant has much bigger problems.

17. Srul Itza At Home Posted: August 02, 2011 at 06:32 AM (#3890926)

Witness unexpectedly dies from peanut poisoning? I think I've seen this plot on NCIS and The Closer.

18. Ron J Posted: August 02, 2011 at 07:17 AM (#3890931)

#17 CSI has an episode where a juror is killed that way. (11 Angry Jurors -- season 4, episode 11)

19. Greg (U)K Posted: August 02, 2011 at 08:20 AM (#3890939)

Unless the prosecution can prove the defendant(s) got rid of the witness. There's an episode of Law and Order based on the Natalee Holloway case that is this exact scenario.

OK, but let's go toe to toe on bird law and see who comes out on top.

20. Greg (U)K Posted: August 02, 2011 at 08:25 AM (#3890940)

Witness unexpectedly dies from peanut poisoning? I think I've seen this plot on NCIS and The Closer.

Not to bring Charlie Day into it again, but also in the film "Horrible Bosses" (where coincidentally Charlie uses his Law & Order knowledge to bust them out of jail)

I've always wondered if Charlie's love of Law & Order is an inside joke about Charlie getting in an episode of the show before any of the other Gang had any acting gigs, and he rubbed their faces in it. Although Rob did get that winning Lost cameo.

EDIT: I see Rob got on Law & Order too...and an even bigger role than Charlie. So I guess it's just Glenn who is the loser.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Monday, August 01, 2011

LA Times: Key witness in Bryan Stow beating dies unexpectedly

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Sponsor

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics