6.30.2010 Levi Page covers Kyron 8:00PMCT 6:00PMPST

[KR2tonenow]

Ray is saying the divorce filing eliminates the marital privilege that could prevent one spouse from testifying against the other in a criminal proceeding.

Sounds about right, at least Kyron's dad is prepared to testify if need be.

 

[sorrell skye]

Still listening to the rerun. Comments about being able to at least charge TH with obstruction of justice if they can prove she lied to investigators (regarding her whereabouts on June 4), even if LE doesn't have evidence to charge her with Kyron's disappearance.

 

[Lavender]

Thank you to everyone for the play-by-play. Sorrell Skye: I can't help but read your recaps with the voices of various muppets as the guests!

 

[sorrell skye]

Levi is asking what they think the polys focused on. The speaker says the questions would be very specific, such as: do you know what happened to Kyron, do you know where Kyron is now, etc. Sorry, but I didn't pause it in time to remember what the other questions she said TH may have been asked. But the speaker stated they would be focused on Kyron, what happened to him, and whether or not TH had any knowledge of what happened to him.

 

[sorrell skye]

Asking Stacy if it's unusual to take 2 polys.

She says if TH showed deception on any of the key questions regarding Kyron's whereabouts or what happened to him, she would be asked to take another one.

ETA: she also said that if TH was on any medication that could affect her responses, the results may have been inconclusive.

 

[AlexisFresca]

Ray is saying the divorce filing eliminates the marital privilege that could prevent one spouse from testifying against the other in a criminal proceeding.

If one decides to stay married in a situation such as this, can a spouse sidestep marital privilege and testify against the other spouse anyway? Or could Th's atty (at trial, ex) object to it due to marital privilege? I was always lead to believe that privilege could be waived if still married.

 

[sorrell skye]

If one decides to stay married in a situation such as this, can a spouse sidestep marital privilege and testify against the other spouse anyway? Or could Th's atty (at trial, ex) object to it due to marital privilege? I was always lead to believe that privilege could be waived if still married.

According to the statements made by one of the speakers, the spouse could file a motion preventing the other from testifying against them.

 

[daisy7]

Ray is saying the divorce filing eliminates the marital privilege that could prevent one spouse from testifying against the other in a criminal proceeding.

I'm not an attorney, but I thought that spouses can not be court-mandated to testify? Not that they couldn't volunteer to testify?

 

[Bathbuddys]

you can testisfy if you want to being married or not and you can also plead the 5th if you are married or not. You have the right to remain silent period.

 

[sorrell skye]

Still listening to the rerun. There is discussion of TH's facial expressions @ the presser & giving their opinions. One speaker is saying her expression looked like a forced expression of grief, comparing her posture & facial expressions to Susan Smith's.

 

[scandi]

I asked about this in another thread but apparently the thread was closed...not sure what I did against TOS, so here goes again-

?This was also mentioned on NG, right?

Does anyone have a link to this? I can't find any info via Sheriff's office to back this up. Who is holding the PR? Is it LE/family/or both?

TIA!:crazy:

I just called KPTV Channel 12 here as they have been so 'on' Kyron's case.

The news editor told me yes, they have heard wind of a news conference coming up but has not heard when it will be. He said he didn't believe it was a LE presser but rather a statement from the family to the media. He was quite \surprised that Nancy Grace's show had already heard about it. They are gong to turn on HLN at the station to watch the 7pm rerun of her show here. lol

That is the post I wrote to you on that thread that was closed. lol Since then I learned it is at 10am and have learned nothing more about if it is from family or LE. xox

 

[aMamaJ]

you can testisfy if you want to being married or not and you can also plead the 5th if you are married or not. You have the right to remain silent period.

The 5th applies only in that you can not testify against yourself. The court can absolutley compell a witness to testify. You can not (always) remain silent, it is not a "right".

IMHO, MOO, etc.

 

[aMamaJ]

I just called KPTV Channel 12 here as they have been so 'on' Kyron's case.

The news editor told me yes, they have heard wind of a news conference coming up but has not heard when it will be. He said he didn't believe it was a LE presser but rather a statement from the family to the media. He was quite \surprised that Nancy Grace's show had already heard about it. They are gong to turn on HLN at the station to watch the 7pm rerun of her show here. lol
*snipped*

You rock! Thank you. :thumb:

 

[daisy7]

Yeah, it was said that if she is arrested that Terri could invoke that right so that may be the reason for the divorce.

Like Levi said, Terri looks guilty because of the timing of the things she did. Its like replaceing the mattress after your wife goes missing. Timing.

Respectfully BBM. I don't believe this is Terri's right. Instead, this is Kaine's right to whether or not he wants to testify about his spouse?

Unleash the lawyers!!

 

[sorrell skye]

I'm not an attorney, but I thought that spouses can not be court-mandated to testify? Not that they couldn't volunteer to testify?

I think what they were referring to is the legal concept that protects spousal communications - marital privilege or whatever they call it. A spouse can't be forced to testify against the other.

But it also appears that if a spouse chooses to testify against the other one, based on private communications or observing behavior, the other spouse can file a motion that prohibits the other from testifying against them, citing marital privilege.

That was my understanding of what they were saying.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Pat says that they don't call people a POI or suspect because they fear lawsuits.
Mentioning the sentinel park bomber as why they rarely call someone a POI anymore,

I am surprised Pat said that because she has it backwards.

They tend not to use the word "suspect" anymore due to the Richard Jewell fiasco (Centennial Park Bomber case) but LE uses "Person of Interest" all the time all over the country and they aren't sued.

And some still come out and use the word "suspect" way before the person is arrested.

So I am very surprised she said this.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I think what they were referring to is the legal concept that protects spousal communications - marital privilege or whatever they call it. A spouse can't be forced to testify against the other.

But it also appears that if a spouse chooses to testify against the other one, based on private communications or observing behavior, the other spouse can file a motion that prohibits the other from testifying against them, citing marital privilege.

That was my understanding of what they were saying.

In most states if the case concerns a minor child then marital privileges do not apply.

IMO

 

[daisy7]

I think what they were referring to is the legal concept that protects spousal communications - marital privilege or whatever they call it. A spouse can't be forced to testify against the other.

But it also appears that if a spouse chooses to testify against the other one, based on private communications or observing behavior, the other spouse can file a motion that prohibits the other from testifying against them, citing marital privilege.

That was my understanding of what they were saying.

I know about attorney, doctor and pastor privileges, but this is the first time I ever heard about a marital privilege that would not allow a spouse to testify.

 

[sorrell skye]

In most states if the case concerns a minor child then marital privileges do not apply.

IMO

Thx for your input, Ocean.

 

[cluciano63]

I am disappointed that even Levi's show is giving out or discussing bad information. I don't think it is useful, personally, having these discussions on a case with so few known facts. Rumors get repeated in various forms instead of quashed. Even Mark Klaas is talking about the cell pings as though this info was released by LE.