GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #37 *Arrest*

[JnRyan]

I can't believe we're about to be on thread #38 and still no Christina. Hoping that'll change today

I was thinking along those lines about an hour ago - are we going to be on thread #40 without Christina?

 

[catpatrol]

Gabriel Roxas ‏@cbs11gabriel 4m4 minutes ago McKinney, TX
We should know very soon whether grand jury indicts Enrique Arochi.

 

[jnblsm]

I was thinking along those lines about an hour ago - are we going to be on thread #40 without Christina?

I have a feeling we'll know more in just a little while...

 

[CookieM]

Gabriel Roxas ‏@cbs11gabriel 4m4 minutes ago McKinney, TX
We should know very soon whether grand jury indicts Enrique Arochi.

I'm sure they will! It would be crazy if they didn't!

 

[daisytrail]

JMO, I would try to hold my judgment and my tongue regarding the guilt or innocence of a suspect in my daughter's disappearance, especially if accusing one of such serious and heinous crimes, at least until after hearing the state's case.

The day may come when someone accuses their son of a crime. I believe they would not want the public and/or the accuser's friends & relatives to "convict" him without hearing all the evidence and allowing him a fair trial by the courts, not the court of public opinion.


I have not been on the same journey that you all and CM's parents have traversed the past 7 months. If I had, perhaps I would be able to call someone a liar, a rapist, a murderer, or (evil/spoiled/narcissistic/entitled/sociopathic/deviant/whatever) with the same certainty,

However...

Neither have any jurors, who may at some point be asked to determine the truth of what happened to Christina early that morning - based on evidence, Texas laws and rules of criminal procedure.

Snipped for focus.

Respectfully, until someone actually has had a close friend or family member disappear, they can only assume what it would feel like, how they might act under the circumstances, how they would look at every person that they knew who had contact with the missing person (wondering if they could be trusted to have had nothing to do with it), fearing that the police might not take the case seriously enough. Also, remember that suspicions may not rise to accusations, but that family and friends retain their freedom of speech and may question in their own minds how to best employ their voice on the loved one's behalf.

The fact is that the police have found cause to arrest EA. If the family is not privy to all details of the investigation (and I would be surprised if they were), then they only have the guidance of the police as to their role and how it might best facilitate justice.

I also see no reason why Christina's family would assume their son (???) would be accused of a crime. Most people don't think like that unless there has been worrisome past behavior. To me, that is a rather strange segue.

If Christina's family actually believe Enrique has murdered Christina, why on earth should they not be angry and act accordingly? They are human, after all.

 

[suzyjackson]

Gabriel Roxas ‏@cbs11gabriel 4m4 minutes ago McKinney, TX
We should know very soon whether grand jury indicts Enrique Arochi.

This is good news, who presents the evidence to the GJ? Is it LE or some kind of lawyer?

Whoever it is I hope they do their best job and ensure there's no doubt in the minds of the jury.

I very much hope they have evidence that we haven't heard yet to make a strong enough case.

We don't have a concensus amongst the regular posters who've followed the case closely so it might not be clear cut for the jury members.

I have everything crossed.

 

[Justme34]

Does her family get to be in the court room today?

 

[daisytrail]

Does her family get to be in the court room today?

My understanding is that only those called as witnesses would be in the grand jury room, and then only one at a time. I don't think such proceedings are much like trials which we see on television.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

This is good news, who presents the evidence to the GJ? Is it LE or some kind of lawyer?

Whoever it is I hope they do their best job and ensure there's no doubt in the minds of the jury.

I very much hope they have evidence that we haven't heard yet to make a strong enough case.

We don't have a concensus amongst the regular posters who've followed the case closely so it might not be clear cut for the jury members.

I have everything crossed.

The prosecution (District Attorney or Assistant District Attorney) will present all the evidence they have (in it's entirety) to the GJ without rebuttal from anyone. It is exclusively their show and no lawyers are allowed inside. There is never a defense presentation. The only way a person may have to defend themselves is to answer by pleading the fifth amendment (stating they cannot testify on grounds of self incrimination).

Their testimony is only secret until after they testify in front of the GJ and if there is no gag order placed on the case.

 

[suzyjackson]

The prosecution (District Attorney or Assistant District Attorney) will present all the evidence they have (in it's entirety) to the GJ without rebuttal from anyone. It is exclusively their show and no lawyers are allowed inside. There is never a defense presentation. The only way a person may have to defend themselves is to answer by pleading the fifth amendment (stating they cannot testify on grounds of self incrimination).

Their testimony is only secret until after they testify in front of the GJ and if there is no gag order placed on the case.

Thank you, that's really helpful and makes me more confident that EA will be indicted. IMO with no defence allowed at this stage it should be a foregone conclusion even if they only present information that's already been made public.

Thinking of the family today

JMO

 

[Circleoflife]

I would be shocked if EA is not indicted. What I'm curious to see is if any other people are charged with anything as a result of information uncovered during the grand jury proceedings.( in the weeks ahead; not today)

 

[BaeMomma]

Brittany Feagans (@BF_StarNews)
3/10/15, 2:24 PM
Awaiting the grand jury's decision on whether to indict or no-bill #EnriqueArochi; hearing both agg kidnapping & child sex assault cases


RE: Twitter

 

[Justme34]

So if there is no gag order then we will know more about this case?

 

[suzyjackson]

Brittany Feagans (@BF_StarNews)
3/10/15, 2:24 PM
Awaiting the grand jury's decision on whether to indict or no-bill #EnriqueArochi; hearing both agg kidnapping & child sex assault cases


RE: Twitter

Does no bill mean he goes free and can't go before the GJ again for the same offence?

 

[Lolly85x]

Does anyone know what time the grand jury started?

 

[jnblsm]

They're listening to BOTH-at the same time? The same GJ?
Is that legal? I mean, of course it must be, but it seems a little strange. IMO

 

[daisytrail]

The prosecution (District Attorney or Assistant District Attorney) will present all the evidence they have (in it's entirety) to the GJ without rebuttal from anyone. It is exclusively their show and no lawyers are allowed inside. There is never a defense presentation. The only way a person may have to defend themselves is to answer by pleading the fifth amendment (stating they cannot testify on grounds of self incrimination).

Their testimony is only secret until after they testify in front of the GJ and if there is no gag order placed on the case.

I am wondering if witnesses testify to things that they have previously said publicly how that would play out subsequent to their testimony before the grand jury. Do they then have to shut up or can they continue to say what they have said before? Grand jury testimony cannot actually gag facts or statements previously discussed can they?

 

[TCMom]

They're listening to BOTH-at the same time? The same GJ?
Is that legal? I mean, of course it must be, but it seems a little strange. IMO

Grand Juries usually serve for a period of months. They hear tons of cases. Not just one. So it's not unusual they would hear multiple charges for people. One of my friends in a different county had to go every month for 6 months I think. I can't remember the specifics.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I am wondering if witnesses testify to things that they have previously said publicly how that would play out subsequent to their testimony before the grand jury. Do they then have to shut up or can they continue to say what they have said before? Grand jury testimony cannot actually gag facts or statements previously discussed can they?

I have to assume there is no control over past statements prior to a subpoena to appear before the GJ, but I also think talking about any of it after receiving the subpoena could be a problem.

 

[jnblsm]

Grand Juries usually serve for a period of months. They hear tons of cases. Not just one. So it's not unusual they would hear multiple charges for people. One of my friends in a different county had to go every month for 6 months I think. I can't remember the specifics.

Seems like it would be difficult for the accused. Granted, they might be guilty of everything. But what if they aren't? Or, what if they are truly innocent of one crime, but completely guilty of another.