1202 users online (176 members and 1026 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 2 of 75 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 52 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 1114
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    My Imagination
    Posts
    2,613
    http://www.naplesnews.com/news/crime...381571271.html


    "...The state stuck to fact-based questions.

    "Their mother is currently dead. Is that correct?" Allain asked Sievers, whose mother in the crowd gasped.

    He gathered himself and took five seconds to respond.

    "Yes."
    ...Detective Owens said the driver is not a suspect in the case...
    snippet from washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/20/suspect-in-dc-mansion-slayings-due-back-in-court

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    The Carolinas
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by FelicityLemon View Post
    http://www.naplesnews.com/news/crime...381571271.html


    "...The state stuck to fact-based questions.

    "Their mother is currently dead. Is that correct?" Allain asked Sievers, whose mother in the crowd gasped.

    He gathered himself and took five seconds to respond.

    "Yes."
    I don't understand, was it Bonnie who gasped? And why? She already knew Teresa was dead.
    MOO

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    My Imagination
    Posts
    2,613
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetCaroline View Post
    I don't understand, was it Bonnie who gasped? And why? She already knew Teresa was dead.
    Yes, it was BS. I think maybe it was so unexpected? Like she didn't expect someone to point out the reason they are there? I thought it was brilliant. Why pussyfoot around the sole reason the children are in this situation?

    Yes, BS, the truth is shocking.

    Brilliant. Brilliant. Brilliant.
    ...Detective Owens said the driver is not a suspect in the case...
    snippet from washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/20/suspect-in-dc-mansion-slayings-due-back-in-court

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Queen City
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by FelicityLemon View Post
    Yes, it was BS. I think maybe it was so unexpected? Like she didn't expect someone to point out the reason they are there? I thought it was brilliant. Why pussyfoot around the sole reason the children are in this situation?

    Yes, BS, the truth is shocking.

    Brilliant. Brilliant. Brilliant.
    This. Great work by the Attny and I love that someone said out loud the reason we are all here (there). MS would love nothing more than if everyone "forgot" TS was MURDERED and just thought that she went away on a trip or something.

    ETA IMO

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    4,281
    Quote Originally Posted by FelicityLemon View Post
    http://www.naplesnews.com/news/crime...381571271.html


    "...The state stuck to fact-based questions.

    "Their mother is currently dead. Is that correct?" Allain asked Sievers, whose mother in the crowd gasped.

    He gathered himself and took five seconds to respond.

    "Yes."
    He "gathered" himself my arse. That folks was nothing more than MS preparing himself for his performance at his trial.

    When I read about the mother gasping, I just assumed it was TS's mother. But after re-reading that article, it does say MS's mother. The only reason I can possibly think of for Bonnie to gasp, would be her assuming the next question would be "Did you orchestrate to have your daughters mother killed?

    ETA ~
    Or possibly it was a misquote from Naples News?

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Long Beach, California
    Posts
    5,229
    I have about had it up to here, with BS and her enabling of MS and what he is putting his children through.

    THIS is the time she could stand up and say enough is enough- put her foot down and let him know that while she loves him she won't support him in any of his schemes against Teresa's family and the girls. She could apologize to MAG and beg forgiveness. Get her behind in therapy for co dependency and whatever other issues she has and read everything she can about narcissists and sociopaths.

    Someone needs to stand up to this man-child and it needs to end her. Without her- who dies he really have? His brother is in MO.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,571
    Quote Originally Posted by Frigga View Post
    I have about had it up to here, with BS and her enabling of MS and what he is putting his children through.

    THIS is the time she could stand up and say enough is enough- put her foot down and let him know that while she loves him she won't support him in any of his schemes against Teresa's family and the girls. She could apologize to MAG and beg forgiveness. Get her behind in therapy for co dependency and whatever other issues she has and read everything she can about narcissists and sociopaths.

    Someone needs to stand up to this man-child and it needs to end her. Without her- who dies he really have? His brother is in MO.

    You can't reason with ignorance. Sounds like their whole family is in need of therapy because their assumption is this how normal healthy ppl behave. She will never leave Marks side unless the court orders her into therapy, which is very unlikely unless DCF requests it.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,423
    http://www.naplesnews.com/news/crime...381571271.html

    According to the article there was a hearing on May 31, 2016, the day before the hearing we watched/heard about on June 1, 2016. Mummers told the Judge he was ready to go but he did NOT tell the truth according to the Judge.

    Elizabeth Parker, attorney for CWW, was not notified until the day before the June 1 hearing date....so that would have been May 31. I wonder if Mummert told her AFTER the hearing with the Judge, on May 31, of course that gives her no time to be ready. Mummers and MS playing games.

    Okay, the next part I am confused....I think there may be an error in the article, please explain anyone if you can. I may be reading it wrong. In quotes is the exact text from the article.

    Mummert "planned to offer Curtis Wayne Wright Jr. as his sole witness in the trial. Mummert listed Wright as a witness a week ago.
    However, Wright's attorney didn't know that. Wright, a friend of Mark Sievers, accepted a 25-year plea deal on a second-degree murder charge in exchange for providing information to help prosecute Jimmy Rodgers and Sievers."

    It states above Mummert was/is using CWW sole witness for MS and that Mummert did not know CWW took a plea deal?!

    Where it saids "Wright's attorney did not know"....do you think it meant Sievers' attorney did not know...'that CWW took a plea deal'? CWW attorney had to know because she helped broker the deal! As for Mummert not knowing....if we all knew and it is been in the paper, then Mummert had to know.

    So, now that Mummert does know that CWW took a plea deal...and is going to testify against CW....will Mummert still call him as their sole witness? Can CWW be a witness for both sides?

    One last question is Mummert DP qualified? I see bumbling antics like Jose Baez in the future...JMO.

    I hope that all made sense to everyone. Thanks.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Born & raised in the Deep South
    Posts
    821
    All of this Mummert "didn't know" is a big sack of ----you know what. Half of the country have read these docs! Heck, pick up a newspaper, Esquire.
    He is acting ridiculous, whatever the motive, and I hope the judge stops him in his slimy tracks.
    It is one thing to provide the best defense you can for your client. It is quite another to start all of this "Judge, I didn't know...." mess.
    Shout out to Mummert: It is your JOB to know. Period.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    972
    Quote Originally Posted by MsJosie View Post
    http://www.naplesnews.com/news/crime...381571271.html

    According to the article there was a hearing on May 31, 2016, the day before the hearing we watched/heard about on June 1, 2016. Mummers told the Judge he was ready to go but he did NOT tell the truth according to the Judge.

    Elizabeth Parker, attorney for CWW, was not notified until the day before the June 1 hearing date....so that would have been May 31. I wonder if Mummert told her AFTER the hearing with the Judge, on May 31, of course that gives her no time to be ready. Mummers and MS playing games.

    Okay, the next part I am confused....I think there may be an error in the article, please explain anyone if you can. I may be reading it wrong. In quotes is the exact text from the article.

    Mummert "planned to offer Curtis Wayne Wright Jr. as his sole witness in the trial. Mummert listed Wright as a witness a week ago.
    However, Wright's attorney didn't know that. Wright, a friend of Mark Sievers, accepted a 25-year plea deal on a second-degree murder charge in exchange for providing information to help prosecute Jimmy Rodgers and Sievers."

    It states above Mummert was/is using CWW sole witness for MS and that Mummert did not know CWW took a plea deal?!

    Where it saids "Wright's attorney did not know"....do you think it meant Sievers' attorney did not know...'that CWW took a plea deal'? CWW attorney had to know because she helped broker the deal! As for Mummert not knowing....if we all knew and it is been in the paper, then Mummert had to know.

    So, now that Mummert does know that CWW took a plea deal...and is going to testify against CW....will Mummert still call him as their sole witness? Can CWW be a witness for both sides?

    One last question is Mummert DP qualified? I see bumbling antics like Jose Baez in the future...JMO.

    I hope that all made sense to everyone. Thanks.
    Made sense. I believe Parker (CWW'S attorney) did not know Mummert was planning on using CWW as a sole witness for the DCF hearing/trial. I would think CWW would be considered a hostile witness. Since we can't think of any GOOD strategy for Mummert wanting to use CWW as a witness, I am thinking Mummert is incompetent until proven otherwise.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    4,281
    Quote Originally Posted by MsJosie View Post
    http://www.naplesnews.com/news/crime...381571271.html

    According to the article there was a hearing on May 31, 2016, the day before the hearing we watched/heard about on June 1, 2016. Mummers told the Judge he was ready to go but he did NOT tell the truth according to the Judge.

    Elizabeth Parker, attorney for CWW, was not notified until the day before the June 1 hearing date....so that would have been May 31. I wonder if Mummert told her AFTER the hearing with the Judge, on May 31, of course that gives her no time to be ready. Mummers and MS playing games.

    Okay, the next part I am confused....I think there may be an error in the article, please explain anyone if you can. I may be reading it wrong. In quotes is the exact text from the article.


    Mummert "planned to offer Curtis Wayne Wright Jr. as his sole witness in the trial. Mummert listed Wright as a witness a week ago.
    However, Wright's attorney didn't know that. Wright, a friend of Mark Sievers, accepted a 25-year plea deal on a second-degree murder charge in exchange for providing information to help prosecute Jimmy Rodgers and Sievers."

    It states above Mummert was/is using CWW sole witness for MS and that Mummert did not know CWW took a plea deal?!

    Where it saids "Wright's attorney did not know"....do you think it meant Sievers' attorney did not know...'that CWW took a plea deal'? CWW attorney had to know because she helped broker the deal! As for Mummert not knowing....if we all knew and it is been in the paper, then Mummert had to know.

    So, now that Mummert does know that CWW took a plea deal...and is going to testify against CW....will Mummert still call him as their sole witness? Can CWW be a witness for both sides?

    One last question is Mummert DP qualified? I see bumbling antics like Jose Baez in the future...JMO.

    I hope that all made sense to everyone. Thanks.
    Wrights attorney (Elizabeth Parker) didn't know that Seiver's attorney (Michael Mummert ) was using her client (CWW) as the sole witness in the DCF trial.
    We just can't figure out why.

    Michael Mummert knows CWW took a plea deal.


    ETA ~
    Oops ~ Sorry Debbie, I didn't see your reply
    Last edited by Dmacky; 06-02-2016 at 02:17 PM.
    Justice for Teresa Sievers (1968 - 2015)

    RIP Sweet Erin Corwin (1994-2014) Forever young


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened"
    ~ Anatole France

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,423
    Thanks Debbie and Dmackyfor the answers....Mummert...I like that...'incompetent until proven otherwise" is a good answer!

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Bonita Springs, FL
    Posts
    99
    I was trying to think of reasons why MS wants CWW to testify...Here you go...

    1. MS has somehow made an agreement with CWW that he'll now say "Mark had nothing to do with this! It was all about me and JRR"
    2. MS wants an opportunity to be in the same room as CWW...Who knows maybe they have some method of communicating via coded beard twitches
    3. CWW could say something in the room that might taint future Jury selection for the MS trial.
    4. MS wants to see who looks better in Orange. Needs to confirm that he is still the hottest.

    Can't wait to see/hear the real reasons.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by fldigger View Post
    I was trying to think of reasons why MS wants CWW to testify...Here you go...

    1. MS has somehow made an agreement with CWW that he'll now say "Mark had nothing to do with this! It was all about me and JRR"
    2. MS wants an opportunity to be in the same room as CWW...Who knows maybe they have some method of communicating via coded beard twitches
    3. CWW could say something in the room that might taint future Jury selection for the MS trial.
    4. MS wants to see who looks better in Orange. Needs to confirm that he is still the hottest.

    Can't wait to see/hear the real reasons.
    OMG, I'm sorry, I know this is a serious subject, but numbers 2 and 4 had me in stitches! Thanks fldigger, I don't think I've laughed so hard at anything for weeks.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    2,560
    Quote Originally Posted by fldigger View Post
    I was trying to think of reasons why MS wants CWW to testify...Here you go...

    1. MS has somehow made an agreement with CWW that he'll now say "Mark had nothing to do with this! It was all about me and JRR"
    2. MS wants an opportunity to be in the same room as CWW...Who knows maybe they have some method of communicating via coded beard twitches
    3. CWW could say something in the room that might taint future Jury selection for the MS trial.
    4. MS wants to see who looks better in Orange. Needs to confirm that he is still the hottest.

    Can't wait to see/hear the real reasons.
    ... coded beard twitches...

    Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Page 2 of 75 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 52 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Sievers Sidebar #3
    By KateB in forum Dr. Teresa Sievers
    Replies: 1099
    Last Post: 06-01-2016, 08:18 AM
  2. Sievers Sidebar #2
    By KateB in forum Dr. Teresa Sievers
    Replies: 1011
    Last Post: 02-21-2016, 03:15 PM
  3. Sievers Sidebar #1
    By beach in forum Dr. Teresa Sievers
    Replies: 1033
    Last Post: 01-23-2016, 10:06 AM

Tags for this Thread