774 users online (109 members and 665 guests)  


Websleuths News


Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southern New England
    Posts
    1,282

    Questions for our verified Lawyers

    I hope it's okay to start this thread. If there is one already and I missed it, I apologize

    Could one of our lawyers answer the question below, if possible? TIA


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by saba View Post
    http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov...2/m5413526.pdf

    9/6/2012 TRIAL DAY TWO

    ...Scott Dutcher from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office is present.
    The jury is not present.
    Discussion is held as to Defendant’s refusal to be transported, Defendant’s jail
    circumstances and the electronic belt worn during trial proceedings. Defendant is cautioned that there will now be a permanent directive that she be transported by any means necessary for trial...


    BBM: I don't get this. I don't know how this is legal, especially if someone is considered innocent until proven guilty. I'm not saying I think she's innocent (I don't) but how is this constitutional? Can't she waive her right to be there?
    __________________

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    7,763
    Quote Originally Posted by my2sense View Post
    I hope it's okay to start this thread. If there is one already and I missed it, I apologize

    Could one of our lawyers answer the question below, if possible? TIA


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by saba View Post
    http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov...2/m5413526.pdf

    9/6/2012 TRIAL DAY TWO

    ...Scott Dutcher from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office is present.
    The jury is not present.
    Discussion is held as to Defendant’s refusal to be transported, Defendant’s jail
    circumstances and the electronic belt worn during trial proceedings. Defendant is cautioned that there will now be a permanent directive that she be transported by any means necessary for trial...


    BBM: I don't get this. I don't know how this is legal, especially if someone is considered innocent until proven guilty. I'm not saying I think she's innocent (I don't) but how is this constitutional? Can't she waive her right to be there?
    __________________
    The judge can force her to be there if he is concerned that she will complain later that, in her absence, her attorneys acted against her interest and direction. In this case, there is about a 100% chance that Elizabeth would do that, given her history.

    "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

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    7,763
    Quote Originally Posted by AZlawyer View Post
    The judge can force her to be there if he is concerned that she will complain later that, in her absence, her attorneys acted against her interest and direction. In this case, there is about a 100% chance that Elizabeth would do that, given her history.
    As for the stun belt, IMO that has to be justified by some showing of a security risk. E.g., if the defendant is a big guy who tends to break people's necks when he gets irritated, a stun belt would be a good plan.

    If Elizabeth (when she's there!) has been calm and respectful in court in the past, IMO the judge ought to reconsider the use of the stun belt.

    "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

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,297
    I would like to know if the baby's body is never found will there be any change Ej will be charged for murder? I think I heard they never charge w/o a body but since then Ive heard sometimes they do..thank you for your answers

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,800
    AZ . . . A big shout out to you regarding the latest filing on this case . . .

    For your reference . . . . originally posted by Artsy
    "Looks like Marc Victor filed a motion to drop the kidnapping charges."

    https://d1nyaafz93r8iu.cloudfront.ne...-e-johnson.pdf

    Quote Originally Posted by seattlechiquita View Post
    WTF???? this one is actually thinking that motion will fly? Unbelievable. UNLESS there is legal basis for it- do we have any verified lawyers following the case with us that we can consult?
    Quote Originally Posted by smokey View Post
    is it the kidnapping charge he wants dropped or just the enhansement-

    allegations of crimes against children?
    Proud member of the AFKBPOFPOPL

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    7,763
    Quote Originally Posted by dizzychick View Post
    I would like to know if the baby's body is never found will there be any change Ej will be charged for murder? I think I heard they never charge w/o a body but since then Ive heard sometimes they do..thank you for your answers
    She won't be charged with murder because there isn't enough evidence to convict. Sometimes there's enough evidence without a body, sometimes there isn't. The defendant's text confession, especially if retracted, won't be enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by wenwe4 View Post
    AZ . . . A big shout out to you regarding the latest filing on this case . . .

    For your reference . . . . originally posted by Artsy
    "Looks like Marc Victor filed a motion to drop the kidnapping charges."

    https://d1nyaafz93r8iu.cloudfront.ne...-e-johnson.pdf
    He's just asking to drop the aggravation part of the charge (dangerous crime against a child), on the theory that the "victim" for purposes of the kidnapping statute was Logan, not Gabriel, because "Gabriel was merely a pawn" to make Logan fear for his (Gabriel's) life, thus any harm that came to Gabriel was "merely a side-effect" of her plan to scare Logan.

    OK, I'm a lawyer, and even I'm kind of shocked by this argument. Creative, yes, but under the circumstances it makes your stomach churn....

    I don't think it will fly, because the kidnapping statute at issue says that you must act with the intent to "place the victim or a third person in reasonable apprehension of imminent physical injury to the victim or the third person"--and the victim is the person you are "restraining"--so I think it's pretty obvious for this one that Gabriel was the "victim" and Logan was the "third person."

    Incidentally, "restraining" includes moving a child from one place to another without the consent of the victim's lawful custodian (which was Logan at the time).

    "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
    Posts
    8,800
    Thank you so much AZ!!!! I agree it makes your stomach churn just reading it!
    Proud member of the AFKBPOFPOPL

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,032
    how much time can she get now that she was not found guilty on all charges-?
    Evil is no faceless stranger, living in a distant neighborhood. Evil has a wholesome, hometown face, with merry eyes and an open smile. Evil walks among us. Dean Koontz

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Anaheim, CA
    Posts
    13,683
    Quote Originally Posted by leighmarker View Post
    how much time can she get now that she was not found guilty on all charges-?
    Well, the media states two to nine years: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_1...lesser-counts/
    For Elizabeth, a minor child, a victim. Thank God she is home!

    *Gitana (means "Gypsy girl"). Pronounced "hee tah nah."

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,032
    so if the judge is nice, she can get time served?
    Evil is no faceless stranger, living in a distant neighborhood. Evil has a wholesome, hometown face, with merry eyes and an open smile. Evil walks among us. Dean Koontz




Similar Threads

  1. Legal Questions for our Verified Lawyers #4
    By Kimster in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 1792
    Last Post: 12-12-2013, 11:50 PM
  2. Questions for our VERIFIED LAWYERS*~*~*NO DISCUSSIONS*~*~*
    By Kimster in forum Zahra Clare Baker
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 07-20-2011, 04:04 PM
  3. Replies: 458
    Last Post: 06-28-2011, 02:16 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 #1
    By The World According in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 1697
    Last Post: 01-14-2011, 02:17 AM