Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #184

New Posts

twall said:
Defense counsel report to the Court that the scheduled trial dates of May 13 - 31, 2024, are inadequate for trial. Defendant waives his speedy trial and moves for a continuance. State objects as they are ready for trial but leaves it to the Court's discretion. Defense motion granted. Jury trial ordered continued and reset to October 14 - November 15, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. in the Carroll Circuit Court.
Click to expand...
RSBM

This characterization of yesterday's hearing is, um, interesting.
 
AugustWest said:
Indiana Jury Rule 4:

Rule 4 - Notice of Selection for Jury Pool and Summons for Jury Service, Ind. Ju. R. 4 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rule 4 - Notice of Selection for Jury Pool and Summons for Jury Service, Ind. Ju. R. 4, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database
casetext.com

Case law on Jury Rule 4:

law.justia.com

Clark v. State

Clark v. State - 659 N.E.2d 548
law.justia.com law.justia.com
Click to expand...
I'm confused, as usual.
How is this even a choice? OR am I misunderstanding the situation?

The judge refused to extend the trial days and wouldn't set a limit for how long Nick could take.
The D's choice was: 1. take your chances with what's here or skip the speedy trial and take this new date (months out).
 
FrostedGlass said:
I'm confused, as usual.
How is this even a choice? OR am I misunderstanding the situation?

The judge refused to extend the trial days and wouldn't set a limit for how long Nick could take.
The D's choice was: 1. take your chances with what's here or skip the speedy trial and take this new date (months out).
Click to expand...

It's like déjà vu (thank you Google for the spelling tip) from last fall's in-chambers ultimatum.

MOO IMO
 
FrostedGlass said:
I'm confused, as usual.
How is this even a choice? OR am I misunderstanding the situation?

The judge refused to extend the trial days and wouldn't set a limit for how long Nick could take.
The D's choice was: 1. take your chances with what's here or skip the speedy trial and take this new date (months out).
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't think it was a choice. I posted Jury Rule 4 to point out that the language of the rule only requires a jury administrator to send out a juror qualification form and "notice of the period during which any service may be performed." The requirement of the rule is met if they do so, and has nothing to do with whether the judge can extend the dates of jury service. I wanted to see about others' opinions on the rule.

I linked Clark v. State as it is the closest progeny to the nexus between Jury Rule 4 and right to speedy trial I have yet found. I plan to keep looking.
 
FrostedGlass said:
I'm confused, as usual.
How is this even a choice? OR am I misunderstanding the situation?

The judge refused to extend the trial days and wouldn't set a limit for how long Nick could take.
The D's choice was: 1. take your chances with what's here or skip the speedy trial and take this new date (months out).
Click to expand...
Bothered me, too. In theory, the P could use it all. 100 percent P, 0 percent D.

OK, they wouldn’t do that. But where then are the limits?
 
AugustWest said:
Personally, I don't think it was a choice. I posted Jury Rule 4 to point out that the language of the rule only requires a jury administrator to send out a juror qualification form and "notice of the period during which any service may be performed." The requirement of the rule is met if they do so, and has nothing to do with whether the judge can extend the dates of jury service. I wanted to see about others' opinions on the rule.

I linked Clark v. State as it is the closest progeny to the nexus between Jury Rule 4 and right to speedy trial I have yet found. I plan to keep looking.
Click to expand...
The more I learn, the dumber I get; so please bear with me.

How does jury deliberation figure in regarding the days allotted?
Will they be sequestered for that?
Will she still sequester them given the new dates?
 
FrostedGlass said:
The more I learn, the dumber I get; so please bear with me.

How does jury deliberation figure in regarding the days allotted?
Will they be sequestered for that?
Will she still sequester them given the new dates?
Click to expand...
Sequestration is all up to the judge. As Gull seems pretty intent on shielding the jury, I feel she will sequester again. I suppose that depends on how long the October trial will take. The longer it is scheduled for, the less likely for sequestration I feel.

Jury deliberation should fall within the days allotted for trial.
 
arielilane said:
The defense wanted 15 days to present its case with no hard end on the May trial date. If Judge Frances Gull would not grant that, defense waived Richard Allen’s right to a speedy trial and asked for a new court date ASAP. Judge set new trial date for October 14.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1787865785639084090


Several contentious exchanges between Judge Gull & defense attorney Bradley Rozzi. Judge: “If you can’t try this case in a month, there’s something wrong.”Rozzi: “You don’t know anything about this case.”
https://twitter.com/x/status/1787871998527324436



During the hearing, defense attorney Andrew Baldwin filed a second request with the court for Judge Gull to be disqualified from the case.


Hearings will be held in Carroll County May 21-23 on several outstanding motions from the defense & state on evidence that will or will not be allowed at trial.


Judge Gull said she would no longer be communicating with the defense by emails because her emails wind up in defense motions, which she considered inappropriate.


UPDATED: Richard Allen’s jury trial for the #DelphiMurders pushed back to October over defense concerns about limited time allotted to present its case.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1787880162501050534
Click to expand...
I kinda think she should have just conceded to an open ended trial that would then get this thing done and over with. Especially since jurors weren't selected yet. What would have been the problem with that?
 
AugustWest said:
If the prosecution already knows the subject matter of the statements, then the prosecution and psychologist have already violated the privilege. Interesting indeed.

Jorgensen v. State, 574 NE 2d 915 - Ind: Supreme Court 1991 - Google Scholar

scholar.google.com scholar.google.com

Click to expand...
I am wondering (and this isn't necessarily directed at you @AugustWest), does the Defense already have the information in hand about what their client may have told this woman? Or did the State just drop this on everyone yesterday when they requested leave to file a motion?

Why would the State have it at all unless the Defense provided it to them? Or the professional called the State to advise them (or emailed them). I am completely perplexed at this. Has RA got NO expectation of privacy even in his medical appointments?
 
AugustWest said:
Sequestration is all up to the judge. As Gull seems pretty intent on shielding the jury, I feel she will sequester again. I suppose that depends on how long the October trial will take. The longer it is scheduled for, the less likely for sequestration I feel.

Jury deliberation should fall within the days allotted for trial.
Click to expand...

When a jury is brought in from another county, besides making them drive back and forth every day, what other choice is there besides sequestration?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 158 more.
Total: 3,337 (members: 159, guests: 3,178)

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
3,178
Total visitors
3,337
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
594,186
Messages
18,000,275
Members
229,335
Latest member
Remsfled
Back
Top