1414 users online (258 members and 1156 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 5 of 61 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 15 55 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 912
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by MIKAYOYO View Post
    So will HF have to testify from jail or will they bring him to court? And will he be in his prison jumpsuit?

    I also wander about the last names with numbers by it. My first tthought were they are inmates but after looking at EA's inmate number, it doesn't appear tthat is right. Any thoughts on who those people are? JMO

    ETA and I wander why they subpeonad a spa?
    I assumed that those with numbers next to their name are police officers and their badge/personnel numbe is listed but I could be wrong.

    There is a Cartopia Auto Spa in Sachse, perhaps EA was cleaning his car there as well as home and Kroger and Sprint.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Doj1234 View Post
    I assumed that those with numbers next to their name are police officers and their badge/personnel numbe is listed but I could be wrong.

    There is a Cartopia Auto Spa in Sachse, perhaps EA was cleaning his car there as well as home and Kroger and Sprint.
    I thought that also but there are some names with "officer" or "detecive" by them. MOO

    ETA: Ok, on the spa. Maybe a typo Cartopia Auto Spa but subpoena says Cartopia AND Spa. I didn't even think of the Car in Cartopia. Just thought it was either a fancy spa or a bath house type spa.
    EVERYTHING I POST IS EITHER MY OPINION, MY EXPERIENCE OR MY BELIEF. MOOYAH

  3. #63
    bump for Christina.
    EVERYTHING I POST IS EITHER MY OPINION, MY EXPERIENCE OR MY BELIEF. MOOYAH

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Land of Ago
    Posts
    15,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Doj1234 View Post
    I assumed that those with numbers next to their name are police officers and their badge/personnel numbe is listed but I could be wrong.

    There is a Cartopia Auto Spa in Sachse, perhaps EA was cleaning his car there as well as home and Kroger and Sprint.
    Possibly employees there saw EA's car with no damage at some point shortly before Christina went missing?

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    461
    The state just applied for subpoena today, does that mean that all of the prior names are defense witnesses?
    http://cijspub.co.collin.tx.us/CaseD...CaseID=1387104

    If so, 188 people may be called to testify that they have no evidence that EA kidnapped CM. idk, but I'm interested to know what will happen at trial.

  6. #66
    SteveS is offline Attention: All my comments are IMO JMO MOO AFAIK etc
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Doj1234 View Post
    The state just applied for subpoena today, does that mean that all of the prior names are defense witnesses?
    http://cijspub.co.collin.tx.us/CaseD...CaseID=1387104

    If so, 188 people may be called to testify that they have no evidence that EA kidnapped CM. idk, but I'm interested to know what will happen at trial.
    LOL - not meant disrespectfully, but I had to laugh at your question, because I can promise you the state subpoena list is longer than the 1 single subpoena requested today.

    I would suggest that the longer list was combined result of both parties (combined for the reason that there will be a ton that both sides want, and no reason to subpoena them twice), with the court at the pre-trial having asked them to have a list prepared so they can get them served. Now the state has decided they have another name to add, and did. There are likely to be a few more from either side between now and trial, with testing ongoing, leads still being pursued, and so on.

    EYA - in this instance, it appears to me that the single subpoena was for a name that was simply overlooked before, for a police officer in the investigation.
    Last edited by SteveS; 10-08-2015 at 04:06 PM.
    REMINDER: All my comments are IMO AFAIK
    All posts are offered imo and to the best of my knowledge.

  7. #67
    SteveS is offline Attention: All my comments are IMO JMO MOO AFAIK etc
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,058
    On a matter relating to the sexual assault of a child charges against EA, it's informative that the defense wants to know of state intent to use 38.37 rules in that case, which pertains to uncharged acts against the victim. It certainly hints of some pattern of predatory behavior. The pertinent wording in the statute says:

    b) Notwithstanding Rules 404 and 405, Texas Rules of Evidence, evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts committed by the defendant against the child who is the victim of the alleged offense shall be admitted for its bearing on relevant matters, including:

    (1) the state of mind of the defendant and the child; and
    (2) the previous and subsequent relationship between the defendant and the child.
    REMINDER: All my comments are IMO AFAIK
    All posts are offered imo and to the best of my knowledge.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveS View Post
    LOL - not meant disrespectfully, but I had to laugh at your question, because I can promise you the state subpoena list is longer than the 1 single subpoena requested today.

    I would suggest that the longer list was combined result of both parties (combined for the reason that there will be a ton that both sides want, and no reason to subpoena them twice), with the court at the pre-trial having asked them to have a list prepared so they can get them served. Now the state has decided they have another name to add, and did. There are likely to be a few more from either side between now and trial, with testing ongoing, leads still being pursued, and so on.
    I'll be the first to admit that I'm not certain if that list included both the defense and state subpoenas. You don't either. Actually, the list was posted a few days after the application previously so neither of us know for sure. It's obvious that people wouldn't be served twice, IMO.

    I think step number one for the defense attorney in a kidnapping case would be to establish that the witnesses being presented actually don't have any knowledge of a kidnapping.
    Last edited by Doj1234; 10-08-2015 at 04:47 PM.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    788
    It took 2-6 days from the time the Defense application was submitted and amended for the list of names. The State only submitted their list today. I feel 99.99997% certain that the State's list isn't on here yet - no one from the Arochi family has been listed as being subject to subpoena. If at least one member of the family isn't put on the stand, there is something seriously wrong.

  10. #70
    SteveS is offline Attention: All my comments are IMO JMO MOO AFAIK etc
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,058
    Quote Originally Posted by TCMom View Post
    It took 2-6 days from the time the Defense application was submitted and amended for the list of names. The State only submitted their list today. I feel 99.99997% certain that the State's list isn't on here yet - no one from the Arochi family has been listed as being subject to subpoena. If at least one member of the family isn't put on the stand, there is something seriously wrong.
    Perhaps so. I'm sure we'll see soon.
    REMINDER: All my comments are IMO AFAIK
    All posts are offered imo and to the best of my knowledge.


  11. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    North of Boston
    Posts
    4,197
    Forgive me for being ill informed, but how in the world could the defense application for subpoena - amended, be a coordinated effort between the defense and the prosecution?
    Sure, the prosecution would want to question some of those witnesses, but if the defense called them then the prosecution can only question them on cross, not on direct.
    If a particular witness subpoenaed by the defense is then declared a hostile witness - as being contrary to the legal position of they who called the witness- then the attorney can ask leading questions as if in cross examination by the party not calling the witness.

    The 2 sides do not share witnesses. A witness is either for the defense or for the prosecution.

    The only time they are "shared" is on cross examination.


    ETA: IMO the prosecution has simply not filed their full list application yet.

    M O O
    All new members and guests;

    To Websleuths!

    A Must Read - Websleuths (WS) Etiquette & Information

    Also - WS Lingo

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    North of Boston
    Posts
    4,197
    Legally a person could not possibly be subpoenaed by both sides.

    " a witness may be called (requested to testify) by either the prosecution or the defense. The side that calls the witness first asks questions, in what is called direct examination. The opposing side then may ask their own questions in what is called cross-examination. In some cases, redirect examination may then be used by the side that called the witness, but usually only to contradict specific testimony from the cross-examination."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness

    Having served on several jury trials I suppose I thought this was general information.
    All new members and guests;

    To Websleuths!

    A Must Read - Websleuths (WS) Etiquette & Information

    Also - WS Lingo

  13. #73
    SteveS is offline Attention: All my comments are IMO JMO MOO AFAIK etc
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,058
    A subpoena is just a notice of a requirement to essentially be available to testify in a case. It neither promises that the person will actually testify, nor does it necessarily indicate who will call him or her to do so, if indeed called to the stand.

    I should add that beyond those basics, there are some variations in types of subpoenas, and where when how they are issued and used. But the basic concepts are all that's important here.
    REMINDER: All my comments are IMO AFAIK
    All posts are offered imo and to the best of my knowledge.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    North of Boston
    Posts
    4,197
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveS View Post
    A subpoena is just a notice of a requirement to essentially be available to testify in a case. It neither promises that the person will actually testify, nor does it necessarily indicate who will call him or her to do so, if indeed called to the stand.

    I should add that beyond those basics, there are some variations in types of subpoenas, and where when how they are issued and used. But the basic concepts are all that's important here.


    "A subpoena commands a person to appear. It is used to compel the testimony of a witness in a trial. Usually, it can be issued by a judge or by the lawyer representing the plaintiff or the defendant in a civil trial or by the prosecutor or the defense attorney in a criminal proceeding. In many jurisdictions, it is compulsory to comply, to take an oath, and to tell the truth, under penalty of perjury."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness

    A subpoena commands a person to appear. It is NOT a notice that hey if you mind and if you're available could you please show up.


    SMH
    All new members and guests;

    To Websleuths!

    A Must Read - Websleuths (WS) Etiquette & Information

    Also - WS Lingo

  15. #75
    SteveS is offline Attention: All my comments are IMO JMO MOO AFAIK etc
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Steleheart View Post
    A subpoena commands a person to appear. It is NOT a notice that hey if you mind and if you're available could you please show up.
    Correct. If you thought I said otherwise, you misread my meaning. My point was that the subpoena means they are required to be available if called to testify, but it is no indication of whether they will indeed be called to actually testify.
    REMINDER: All my comments are IMO AFAIK
    All posts are offered imo and to the best of my knowledge.

Page 5 of 61 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 15 55 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1005
    Last Post: 04-16-2015, 02:43 PM
  2. Replies: 961
    Last Post: 01-05-2015, 09:13 PM
  3. Replies: 1007
    Last Post: 12-31-2014, 06:09 PM
  4. Replies: 968
    Last Post: 09-20-2014, 10:47 PM
  5. TX TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #3 *Arrest*
    By OkieGranny in forum 2010's Missing
    Replies: 1381
    Last Post: 09-14-2014, 07:13 PM

Tags for this Thread