1084 users online (238 members and 846 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 31 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 459
  1. #1

    Questions for our VERIFIED LAWYERS*~*~*NO DISCUSSIONS*~*~*

    Please list your questions for verified lawyers on the board.


    *~*~*~*~* NO DISCUSSIONS PLEASE *~*~*~*~*

    If you would like to add yourself as an expert in a certain field or an insider to a case, please contact Tricia.

    If you do not wish to be identified as an expert in a certain area, we only ask that you refrain from answering questions that are specifically directed to those that have been verified as specialist in their area.

    If a member posts with "expertise" please check to make sure they are on this list. If not, please do not take their post as professional information, but rather just as another opinion ;much as you would with any member of the general posting membership.

  2. #2
    The restraining order says:

    "I believe respondent is involved in the disappearance of my son Kyron who has been missing since June 4, 2010. I also recently learned that respondent attempted to hire someone to murder me,'' Kaine Horman wrote in his petition. "The police have provided me with probable cause to believe the above two statements to be true."

    Could I have an attorney's take on this please? Why would Kaine use the term 'probable cause'?

    It seems to me that he is attesting to the fact that these are things he believes, that he offers this information in good faith, that they are true to his best knowledge and understanding, versus LE offering testimony that on probable cause in the legal sense.

    No probable cause statements were attached with the restraining order. No further info on what he'd been told.

    Here's the restraining order:
    http://www.koinlocal6.com/media/lib/.../FULLORDER.pdf

  3. #3
    Terri is currently living in the Horman home. Kaine moved out with the baby last Saturday, and it was reported to be at the prompting of LE, or at least based on LE giving him info.

    Now, Kaine is asking that Terri be forced to move out of their house.

    It seems to me that legally, an attorney could maybe argue that Terri effectively forced Kaine (and the baby) to move out by posing a threat to their well-being (and life!). But... IANAL It does seem from a moral standpoint that Kaine has more rights to the home than Terri does, but what about legally? What arguments can an attorney use in this situation?

    Here's the motion:
    http://www.koinlocal6.com/media/lib/...ed_Hearing.pdf

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    2,244
    Thanks for this thread - I think it will be a great resource. I'm still in law school, and sometimes a little information is a bad thing! It's great to have people who are knowledgable explain things in this case, as murky as it is.

    Regarding the "probable cause" mention in the RO - if LE probable cause relies on the "failed" polygraphs (per KH and DY) and the word of the landscaper, how would this stand up in court? If there is no additional evidence, other than what we are currently aware, does LE have probable cause to arrest TMH or search her belongings?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    7,763
    Quote Originally Posted by BeanE View Post
    The restraining order says:

    "I believe respondent is involved in the disappearance of my son Kyron who has been missing since June 4, 2010. I also recently learned that respondent attempted to hire someone to murder me,'' Kaine Horman wrote in his petition. "The police have provided me with probable cause to believe the above two statements to be true."

    Could I have an attorney's take on this please? Why would Kaine use the term 'probable cause'?

    It seems to me that he is attesting to the fact that these are things he believes, that he offers this information in good faith, that they are true to his best knowledge and understanding, versus LE offering testimony that on probable cause in the legal sense.

    No probable cause statements were attached with the restraining order. No further info on what he'd been told.

    Here's the restraining order:
    http://www.koinlocal6.com/media/lib/.../FULLORDER.pdf
    My guess is that someone (LE) used the term "probable cause" during their recent discussions with him, but that, in the restraining order papers, he is just using the term to mean "plenty of reason for me to think it's true."

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    7,763
    Quote Originally Posted by BeanE View Post
    Terri is currently living in the Horman home. Kaine moved out with the baby last Saturday, and it was reported to be at the prompting of LE, or at least based on LE giving him info.

    Now, Kaine is asking that Terri be forced to move out of their house.

    It seems to me that legally, an attorney could maybe argue that Terri effectively forced Kaine (and the baby) to move out by posing a threat to their well-being (and life!). But... IANAL It does seem from a moral standpoint that Kaine has more rights to the home than Terri does, but what about legally? What arguments can an attorney use in this situation?

    Here's the motion:
    http://www.koinlocal6.com/media/lib/...ed_Hearing.pdf
    I believe Kaine said in the application that the house was in his name alone, which might make things easier. But basically the judge can order her to stay away from the house even if she owns half of it. She might be entitled to some kind of compensation down the road (in the divorce proceeding) for being forced to vacate her own home, but the judge in the restraining order proceeding can make the order.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    7,763
    Quote Originally Posted by AnaTeresa View Post
    Thanks for this thread - I think it will be a great resource. I'm still in law school, and sometimes a little information is a bad thing! It's great to have people who are knowledgable explain things in this case, as murky as it is.

    Regarding the "probable cause" mention in the RO - if LE probable cause relies on the "failed" polygraphs (per KH and DY) and the word of the landscaper, how would this stand up in court? If there is no additional evidence, other than what we are currently aware, does LE have probable cause to arrest TMH or search her belongings?
    If LE had "probable cause" in the technical legal, criminal-law sense of the phrase, IMO they would have arrested her by now--UNLESS they think that Kyron is still alive and that not arresting Terri will lead to his safe recovery. But I can't really think of a reasonable scenario fitting those requirements.

    And no, I don't think failed polygraphs and the word of a landscaper that couldn't be confirmed through a "sting" operation would constitute probable cause. But confirmed lies about her whereabouts at critical times (e.g. through cell phone pings), combined with maybe phone records, purchase records, or computer records that were suspicious...that might do it.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    State of Disarray
    Posts
    6,799
    Thanks for coming over here too AZ!!
    "Until you do right by me, everything you think about is gonna crumble... until you do right by me, everything you think about is gonna fail."

  9. #9
    Thank you so much, AZ! Great to see you here.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,852
    Thanks for your expertise AZlawyer - appreciate your time.

    Since Kaine owns the home is he able to give the okay for LE to search and seize without a warrant, and if so, would that include house, belongings (computer etc.) and land. TIA
    Please think long and hard before calling a child a 'run-a-way':
    You might be giving a 'perk' to the 'perp'.


    Democracy requires the occasional necessity of deferring to the opinions of other people. (Winston Churchill)


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    7,763
    Quote Originally Posted by eyes4crime View Post
    Thanks for your expertise AZlawyer - appreciate your time.

    Since Kaine owns the home is he able to give the okay for LE to search and seize without a warrant, and if so, would that include house, belongings (computer etc.) and land. TIA
    Yes, and I believe he already did that.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  12. #12
    Terri allegedly tried to hire the landscaper to murder Kaine in November. Obviously no one has murdered Kaine. I can't think of any charges that could be brought against the landscaper, but... IANAL. What about if he agreed to do it, but (obviously) never carried it out? What about if Terri paid him to do it, and he accepted that payment and agreed to it, but again, never carried it out? Any possible charges for that?

    What about if Terri just sort of tossed around the idea with the landscaper, but no agreement or payment was made? Any possible charges against Terri for that?

    Thanks so much!
    BeanE

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    7,763
    Quote Originally Posted by BeanE View Post
    Terri allegedly tried to hire the landscaper to murder Kaine in November. Obviously no one has murdered Kaine. I can't think of any charges that could be brought against the landscaper, but... IANAL. What about if he agreed to do it, but (obviously) never carried it out? What about if Terri paid him to do it, and he accepted that payment and agreed to it, but again, never carried it out? Any possible charges for that?

    What about if Terri just sort of tossed around the idea with the landscaper, but no agreement or payment was made? Any possible charges against Terri for that?

    Thanks so much!
    BeanE
    I'm not familiar with the specific state laws of Oregon, but there could be conspiracy and/or attempt charges, based on how far the landscaper and/or Terri went to try to carry out the plan. There also could be charges against Terri just for making the offer, even if the landscaper declined to get involved.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    282
    I assume that Terri's lawyer does not have the right to request any disclosures (discovery) from LE at this point because Terri has not been charged. For the sake of my question, I will also assume the LE has not handed over any information. Are the media "leaks" and statements from DY and KH a way of letting him know just what they may have? Are they hoping he will advise his client to open up about what she knows?
    Last edited by SacreBleu; 07-11-2010 at 04:57 PM. Reason: Punctuation

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,710
    The following questions are based upon possibilities, and are not intended to imply that the situations I have described below are anything more than speculation based upon my own evaluation of this investigation.

    (Unleash the lawyers!)

    Would it be reasonable to assume that, if Terri's lawyer had anything at all to say in his client's favor, he would have made a public statement by now?


    What are some possible reasons that this particular lawyer would choose not to make any public statement about Terri's position in this investigation? Is it likely that he has made an official statement to LE which has not yet been made public?

    If Terri's lawyer were to become convinced that Terri had indeed committed a crime against Kyron, would he have any reason to delay resignation as her legal counsel? Would it make a difference if a lawyer simply became convinced by evidence of his client's guilt or if the client admitted guilt to the lawyer? Is it ever wise to continue representing a client in such a situation, even though the lawyer could not argue innocence without perjuring himself?

    TIA for sharing your legal expertise with us!

Page 1 of 31 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Legal Questions for our VERIFIED Lawyers
    By beach in forum Lisa Irwin
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-29-2015, 02:16 PM
  2. Questions for our verified Lawyers
    By my2sense in forum Gabriel Johnson
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-19-2012, 12:05 PM
  3. Questions for our VERIFIED LAWYERS*~*~*NO DISCUSSIONS*~*~*
    By Kimster in forum Zahra Clare Baker
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 07-20-2011, 04:04 PM
  4. Legal Questions for our VERIFIED Lawyers #3
    By beach in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 1282
    Last Post: 06-20-2011, 07:34 PM
  5. Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #2
    By BondJamesBond in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 1610
    Last Post: 05-09-2011, 09:28 PM

Tags for this Thread