Their mother still lives at the home but has suffered major dementia for about eight years, according to her son. On Thursday, she was at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center in Martinez.
People "suffering from major dementia for eight years" will have some problems. Will they be totally out there, unable to remember everything? No, but there should be confusion of some short or long term memory. Major is a word obviously given to him by someone. Was it by pg to circumvent culpability in case he was caught? Was it a medical professional (which I highly doubt he brought her to appointments, or he would have said that), or was she really just a little bit forgetful and she doesn't have "major dementia".
Not trying to argue with YOU Billylee, but with the concept that she had a major memory problem. Doesn't seem to fit, with the interview she gave.
Caring for a dementia or alzheimers victim is a major undertaking. I admire you for all that you do for your Mother in law!!! I hope you have respite care at times so you can have a break!!
JMO, but I don't think PG's appearance changes are all that unusual. NG's appearance changed a lot in all of the pictures I've seen of her, as well. It's normal. I do, however, think it's important for LE to take note of his different appearances over the years to compare to other possible missing persons cases.
By Sam Stanton
Published: Monday, Nov. 9, 2009 - 10:37 am
Nancy Garrido's court-appointed attorney has been removed from the case, pending a possible appeal later this month, court records indicate.
The move took place last Thursday in a secret court hearing during which only Nancy Garrido, defense attorney Gilbert Maines, court staff and security officers were present, according to El Dorado County Superior Court records.
A court order issued the day before the hearing indicates that "the court is in receipt of confidential evidence," but there is no indication of what it might be.
The hearing itself was held behind closed doors, and afterward Judge Douglas Phimister ordered Maines relieved as Garrido's attorney. The judge also ordered that Maines' removal be stayed until Nov. 30 and that if an appeal is issued it will be sealed.
All records of the Thursday hearing also were ordered sealed.
Maines and Deputy District Attorney James Clinchard did not respond to telephone messages today, but a veteran defense attorney and former prosecutor said it appears as though Garrido sought the removal of her attorney in what is referred to as a "Marsden hearing."
"Ninety-nine times out of 100 that's how it works," said attorney William J. Portanova. "One time out of 100 it's the attorney who wants out of the case."
Maines was in the national spotlight after being appointed as Garrido's attorney and appearing on NBC's Today show, where he said his client was "distraught" and "scared" and "seems to be a little lost."
He also said he planned to have his client evaluated to assess her state of mind.
Authorities believe Nancy Garrido may have been the one who grabbed Jaycee Lee Dugard and pulled her into a car with her husband, Phillip, in 1991 when Dugard was an 11-year-old girl walking to her school bus stop.
Both are charged with kidnap, rape and other charges and are believed to have held Dugard for 18 years, most of the time in the backyard of the Garrido's Antioch-area home.
Both have pleaded not guilty to the charges, which could send them to prison for life.
The Garridos, who being held at the El Dorado County Jail, are scheduled to return to court Dec. 11 as their case proceeds.
Hmmm??? ... thanks anthro.
I wonder what's up, probably that Nancy asked he be removed... I wouldn't doubt Phillip is behind it one way or another, maybe they didn't want her state of mind assessed
Removing Nancy's attorney can very well be a delay tactic. since the next hearing is on December 11 they may ask for a postponement till her new lawyer is up to speed.
He is better off not defending her anyway. JMO
I cant see it adding to his career at all, yes it is high profile but he can only get hate mail from this case.
Last edited by songline; 11-09-2009 at 06:00 PM.
Women are Angels.
And when someone breaks our wings,
we simply continue to fly... on a broomstick.
We're flexible like that.
Has it been brought up in this thread that Nancy is actually charged in a separate charge with forcible rape in this case? I looked over the threads here and really didn't see anyone discussing that, but, unless she confessed that, which I doubt, that information had to come from either Jaycee or Phillip, correct?
I just now saw these posts about Nancy's attorney. Ooops, I started a new thread, sorry.
I counted 6 forcible rape charges for each of them. Frankly, I don't understand the way the charges read at all. Why would they charge them with forcible lewd acts on a child, specifying that sexual intercourse took place, instead of more forcible rape charges? Why do each of the charges cover such a large time span? Why do they give a date of "between 10th June 1991 and 3rd May 1994" for the kidnapping charge? Most of the dates make no sense to me, but I would think of all the dates for charges that the kidnapping would be the easiest to pin down
Not sure what you mean by detaining about the kidnap charge? She was kidnapped on 6/10/1991. They have separate false imprisonment charges.
What's interesting date wise is that the charges generally run a span from the 1st of the month through the 30th or 31st, except the kidnapping charge which spans the date of the actual kidnapping through 5/3/1994. The only other charge to be dated that way is the Lewd Acts charge for that year: 1/1/94-5/3/94. Is 5/3/1994 when PG was sent back to prison?
ETA: my mistake. He was sent back to prison in 1993.
Last edited by anthroamy; 11-10-2009 at 01:39 AM.
After the hearing, Chief Assistant District Attorney William Clark refused to specify Nancy Garrido's role or detail the evidence prosecutors have.
"She's legally charged with rape based on the theory she participated in it," he said. "We don't have to prove she physically did a rape. All we have to prove is she aided and abetted with knowledge of the crime."
There's some reason to get rid of her lawyer. My thoughts on that tend towards she told him something and doesn't want it to effect his representation of her or help in any claim of something Phillip did? He would still have to maintain lawyer/client confidentiality I think. Could just be Phillip wants a coordinated story and needs to get rid of her current lawyer to do that? I think Nancy as the victim doesn't fit well with the changed man story.