8 Oct 2010 - Elizabeth's attorneys move for dismissal

New Posts

Whatever EJ said in that interview could very well be the closest to truth anyone has heard from her if he truly did make some sort of a connection with her.
 
I just don't understand the "Antics" here if you will, or if these are the right words...that will help Logan remotely try to find his son now.
 
Maybe EJ hallucinated more than what really happened. Was the interview video taped?
 
First of all, I don't understand why Alcock wants us to suddenly believe anything coming from the client he tried to deem incompetent to stand trial. Really?!?

Not that I'm doubting a meeting took place - which was probably against SOP - I just don't think it happened as EJ claims. And again, she certainly hasn't given us any reason to believe her.

Second, I really don't know how some defense attys can sleep at night. I understand they have a job to do and everyone has rights -- but what about GABRIELS rights? It just sickens me that her attys would be okay letting EJ go never knowing what has happened to this baby or where he's at. Just because a detective interviewed her when he probably shouldn't have means Gabe's family never gets to know where he is? Sad. Very sad.

There should be some sort of clause in the constitution for situations like this. I'm sorry, but not everyone deserves rights.
 
kappy50 said:
If this is e-filed...I wonder how long it would take to rule on it ?
Click to expand...

At least a month, unless the State decides to respond more quickly than required, and EJ's attorneys reply more quickly than required.
 
The attorneys claim their relationship with Johnson has been damaged beyond repair because of the interview and they no longer could ethically represent her, according to the court document.

Ok, what am I missing? I don't understand how her attorneys' relationship with her has been damaged nor why they can no longer 'ethically' represent her. What do those things have to do with her complaint about an inappropriate interview with a police detective?
 
hmmmm....... Makes me wonder if this detective from SA was really close to getting a confession out of her.
 
LadyL said:
The attorneys claim their relationship with Johnson has been damaged beyond repair because of the interview and they no longer could ethically represent her, according to the court document.

Ok, what am I missing? I don't understand how her attorneys' relationship with her has been damaged nor why they can no longer 'ethically' represent her. What do those things have to do with her complaint about an inappropriate interview with a police detective?
Click to expand...

I don't know why they're using that wording, but it really doesn't matter. The legal issue is that the detective knew she had a lawyer, but interviewed her anyway. That's a huge no-no.

All I can think is that he let his emotions, and his dedication to finding out what happened to Gabe, get the best of his judgement. It is understandable to me from a human perspective, but it is not a legal defense to what he did. What he did is legally wrong.

I don't know if they could bring other charges against her and hold her on those. I don't know what other charges they could bring that are related, but that she's not currently held on. Child neglect maybe?
 
kissdegirl said:
BBM. You have got to be kidding me! This sounds completely made-up by somebody who was clearly not in her right mind! This is BS. Total BS.
She gets out...no Gabriel, period. This is sickening.
Click to expand...

unfortunately, it says that two Tempe police officers confirmed the whole thing like the hand holding and sitting knee to knee. This guy could very well lead EJ to getting away with everything. I am not sure if AZ lawyer has answered this but what are the chances everything against her gets dismissed over this? Especially since there are witnesses!
 
If she walks, Gabriel will never be found. But can y'all just imagine if EJ gets off and TPS gets convicted...
 
I also think this new information which is not new but just now coming out is an effort on EJ's atty's part to quit her case. Why are they now all of a sudden worried about what took place in that interview? I don't think they knew what they were getting into and I think they are also trying to not have any bad press on their reputation or law firm...JMO I think the judge could just rule anything related to that interview inadmissable, appoint her a PD and let Alcock and Assc. off the hook. I also think a detective change in SA is warranted. As a tax payer of Bexar Cty it outrages me that he did this. He knew better.

I also agree with BeanE as posted above..I don't think he meant to harm the case at least not intentionally. I choose to believe that he is so invested he let his emotions get the better of him. It was wrong though and has some potentially serious consequences.
 
LadyL said:
The attorneys claim their relationship with Johnson has been damaged beyond repair because of the interview and they no longer could ethically represent her, according to the court document.

Ok, what am I missing? I don't understand how her attorneys' relationship with her has been damaged nor why they can no longer 'ethically' represent her. What do those things have to do with her complaint about an inappropriate interview with a police detective?
Click to expand...

I think this is in response to the letter from EJ that was made public that totally bashed their firm. They're trying to protect their rep and push the negative press on SAPD.

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/1006elizabeth-johnson-letter.pdf
 
Just thinking outside the box here, but what if the "interview" was part of a plan intended to have the AZ charges against EJ dropped, so that SA can then step in and file a murder indictment against her - hoping that when finally facing the death penalty, she will tell EVERY detail....

Just a thought....
 
sleuth2001 said:
unfortunately, it says that two Tempe police officers confirmed the whole thing like the hand holding and sitting knee to knee. This guy could very well lead EJ to getting away with everything. I am not sure if AZ lawyer has answered this but what are the chances everything against her gets dismissed over this? Especially since there are witnesses!
Click to expand...

I apologize, my emotions were getting the better of me. I was trying to say that it angered me, and not that the encounter was total BS. I am thinking the intimacy of the encounter may have been exaggerated by somebody highly medicated, or that the events failed to happen in the way her lawyers have said she said.
 
this has got to be the strangest case! I am still wondering if this would be enough to get her charges dropped? I realize the seriousness of it but Gabriel missing and maybe dead is of more importance than a violation of her rights. This is so :banghead:! I can not believe our justice system!:twocents:
 
artsy1 said:
Just thinking outside the box here, but what if the "interview" was part of a plan intended to have the AZ charges against EJ dropped, so that SA can then step in and file a murder indictment against her - hoping that when finally facing the death penalty, she will tell EVERY detail....

Just a thought....
Click to expand...

I dunno, w/o a body, and murder evidence, can they just charge her with murder?
My thought was this, was this detective in love with her and wanted to help her go free by intentionally violating these rules? I can't imagine WHY else on earth he'd do this, given he's in LE. Did he really mean it that he's her "friend" and wanted to help her, and this is how he is going to help her get out?

Also, even if the detective did violate certain rules, WHY would this end in EJ's kidnapping charges being dropped? Did she NOT kidnap Gabrile and possibly kill him? I mean, why does GABRIEL end up paying for it when the detective made a legal error? Why does Elizabeth go FREE if the detective made a legal error? Punish the detective or void the evidence from the interview?

It is SO bizarre to me that this would be a possible outcome.
would someone please explain WHY an error of the detective, would result in EJ being freed and GABRIEL getting no justice for being missing or dead? Why does the detective's mistake make EJ's actions OKAY?

1 more thing - I wonder WHY is this coming out only now? i remember a while back, when EJ wanted to fire Alcock, she said that her grandma had paid them 50k (?) or something because they promised they'd get her off on a procedural error but that never happened. i guess this is what she is talking about... i don't recall where i saw it, does anyone have the link? Is this Alcock's strategy to protect his own reputation, or a timed attempt to save EJ after the insanity plea did not work out?
 
sleuth2001 said:
unfortunately, it says that two Tempe police officers confirmed the whole thing like the hand holding and sitting knee to knee. This guy could very well lead EJ to getting away with everything. I am not sure if AZ lawyer has answered this but what are the chances everything against her gets dismissed over this? Especially since there are witnesses!
Click to expand...

hmmmm.... so EJ's hands and knees got touched by someone, and this is proven by witnesses! POOR POOR GIRL FOR ALL HER SUFFERINGS, we should immediately set her free cuz that is MUCH MUCH WORSE THAN her having kidnapped and possibly killed a baby.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 66 more.
Total: 3,681 (members: 67, guests: 3,614)

Online statistics

Members online
67
Guests online
3,614
Total visitors
3,681
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,623
Messages
17,972,064
Members
228,845
Latest member
butiwantedthatname
Back
Top