I am a faithful follower of your posts. I admire your knowledgement and contributions here. But gee whiz, LE giving anything they can to Kaine, isn't that stacking the deck against Terri, and legally unfair?
Questions for our VERIFIED LAWYERS*~*~*NO DISCUSSIONS*~*~*
- Thread starter Kimster
- Start date
I am a faithful follower of your posts. I admire your knowledgement and contributions here. But gee whiz, LE giving anything they can to Kaine, isn't that stacking the deck against Terri, and legally unfair?
AZlawyer
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 7,883
- Reaction score
- 2,122
Well, we don't know what LE would have done, for example, if they had info that Kaine was plotting to have Terri killed. My speculation and hope is that they would have given the same information to Terri that they gave to Kaine: you are in danger and should leave the house.
But as far as general information regarding the results of the investigation, it is perfectly normal and, IMO, OK for LE to distinguish between giving information to the victim's next of kin and giving information to the prime suspect. I would expect LE to say to Kaine, for example, "We have interviewed DDS and she told us __________ about Terri's whereabouts that day." I would not expect them to tell Terri that information unless they wanted to get her reaction to it.
If LE later determined that Terri should be cleared as a suspect, I imagine LE would continue to distinguish (properly) between giving information to the victim's father and giving information to the victim's soon-to-be-ex-stepmother.
Originally Posted by AZlawyer
Oh, I understood it was just your opinion, and I agree that there is a level of discretion that citizens expect from LE. My speculation is that the officers in this case just feel so terrible for Kaine that they are giving him anything they can.
Since the message exchange is obviously from MC's phone, isn't it possible MC gave the exchange to KH and his attorney WITHOUT LE's involvement?
Oh, I understood it was just your opinion, and I agree that there is a level of discretion that citizens expect from LE. My speculation is that the officers in this case just feel so terrible for Kaine that they are giving him anything they can.
Since the message exchange is obviously from MC's phone, isn't it possible MC gave the exchange to KH and his attorney WITHOUT LE's involvement?
To our esteemed lawyers: I really appreciate your contributions and clarifications.
This issue of giving Kaine info. has always puzzled and, truthfully, steamed me. MCSO conducted the sting on June 26, and IIRC they already knew, per the landscaper, that he had never had any intention of murdering KH. Thus, at that time there was no threat of harm to Kaine from the landscaper. Perhaps that's why Kaine elaborated further, in his initial filings, to the effect that LE told him Terri MIGHT have tried to hire others to kill him. I have no idea whether LE told him that or not.
I come from a huge city and, frankly, if this kind of apparent chumminess between LE and a family member came to light here, it definitely would NOT play well in the public eye.
This issue of giving Kaine info. has always puzzled and, truthfully, steamed me. MCSO conducted the sting on June 26, and IIRC they already knew, per the landscaper, that he had never had any intention of murdering KH. Thus, at that time there was no threat of harm to Kaine from the landscaper. Perhaps that's why Kaine elaborated further, in his initial filings, to the effect that LE told him Terri MIGHT have tried to hire others to kill him. I have no idea whether LE told him that or not.
I come from a huge city and, frankly, if this kind of apparent chumminess between LE and a family member came to light here, it definitely would NOT play well in the public eye.
There were some names mentioned in these emails..that I have never seen mentioned on MSM. Can/could these individuals file a libel suit ( if that is what it would be, I am not sure) against the person, or persons who exposed their names in regards to this case?
Just curious as to what this "housekeeping issues" refers to and as to whether or not TH & KH will be required to be there.?
The two parties are due again in court on Nov. 4 for housekeeping issues, according to the clerk for Multnomah County Judge Keith Meisenheimer.
The judge has set aside a week of hearings Jan. 4 through Jan. 7 to address their dispute over the restraining order and money Moulton Horman has paid to Houze.
-- Lynne Terry
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/10/kaine_horman_wants_mental_eval.html
The two parties are due again in court on Nov. 4 for housekeeping issues, according to the clerk for Multnomah County Judge Keith Meisenheimer.
The judge has set aside a week of hearings Jan. 4 through Jan. 7 to address their dispute over the restraining order and money Moulton Horman has paid to Houze.
-- Lynne Terry
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/10/kaine_horman_wants_mental_eval.html
AZlawyer
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 7,883
- Reaction score
- 2,122
Yes, that's possible.
I don't get it. To me, it's a pretty reasonable conclusion that if Terri unsuccessfully tried to hire the landscaper to kill Kaine, she might have successfully hired some other guy to kill Kaine--in which case he would need to get the heck out of the house.
He was communicating with a suspect on her "clean" phone. Terri might have texted something incriminating. He might have been an accomplice. LE had no idea what they were acting so chummy about.
Exposing someone's name in connection with a case is not libel. Did someone say something false about these people?
Not sure what the "housekeeping" issues are. Sounds like a status conference (i.e., boring).
Parties are hardly ever required to come to court appearances, if they are represented by counsel.
mmmagique
Deliver us from evil
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2010
- Messages
- 1,782
- Reaction score
- 104
FR: Are you saying that the affidavit they filed claiming that "LE has told him that more than one circuit court judge has determined there is probable cause to implicate TH in both Ky's disappearance and in the MFH plot" is a lie?
Emma Peel
an unexpected turn of events
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2008
- Messages
- 11,174
- Reaction score
- 8,938
okay a question that's probably very easy to answer:
If Kaine owns the phone the sexts were on, isn't the record of texts on his phone (obtained from the phone company) his to do with what he wants? Same with MC?
One would think the text record (the sexts) don't belong to Terri unless they were made on a phone/service she owned.
Kinda like how your employer owns all your *advertiser censored* surfing records? And can use them to fire you?
If Kaine owns the phone the sexts were on, isn't the record of texts on his phone (obtained from the phone company) his to do with what he wants? Same with MC?
One would think the text record (the sexts) don't belong to Terri unless they were made on a phone/service she owned.
Kinda like how your employer owns all your *advertiser censored* surfing records? And can use them to fire you?
Thanks for your response, AZlawyer. I guess my question is more "how" would LE have known to subpoena his records? If Terri was using a "clean" phone and MC was just a pivate citizen, where would they get their probable cause?
Is it possible that they were following Terri that night and after she showed up at MC's house, that gave them probable cause? Or the fact that he showed up at the Horman home on June 28th?
I was of the opinion that MC had voluntarily turned over his records, but I was trying to figure how LE would even know to look into MC and his phone records. I hope I'm making some sense.
TIA
Is it possible that they were following Terri that night and after she showed up at MC's house, that gave them probable cause? Or the fact that he showed up at the Horman home on June 28th?
I was of the opinion that MC had voluntarily turned over his records, but I was trying to figure how LE would even know to look into MC and his phone records. I hope I'm making some sense.
TIA
AZlawyer
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 7,883
- Reaction score
- 2,122
okay a question that's probably very easy to answer:
If Kaine owns the phone the sexts were on, isn't the record of texts on his phone (obtained from the phone company) his to do with what he wants? Same with MC?
One would think the text record (the sexts) don't belong to Terri unless they were made on a phone/service she owned.
Kinda like how your employer owns all your *advertiser censored* surfing records? And can use them to fire you?
Yes, but I think most people have concluded that the texts were made on Terri's new "clean" phone.
Also, IIRC for most phones and phone companies the phone company does not maintain any record of the actual content of the text messages.
If I were the detective on the case, I would have been knocking on MC's door to ask him a few friendly questions the morning after Terri took her little secret "I'm so worried about the baby" drive over to his house. He is a person who supposedly just met the chief suspect in the case but is seen going to her house, and she is seen going to his house, and they seem awfully chummy for brand new acquaintances...you bet LE would have some questions. You don't need probable cause to ask questions. My guess is that LE asked questions and MC answered them truthfully and turned over whatever they asked for voluntarily--no need for any probable cause determination.
BeanE
Inactive
Posting for reference.
Law enforcement has provided, to me and Respondent's attorney, records of text messages between Respondent and Michael Cook.
Kaine's deposition, item #17, PDF page 8
http://images.bimedia.net/documents/102610_kaine_terri_custody_affidavit-new.pdf
I have a question about Rackner's legal strategy. She seems to have intentionally "unredacted" this latest version of the texts attached to the motion. Is it possible that Bunch and Houze do not have access to the rest of the texts that might put TH in a better light? To access those, might they have to subpoena them? Does that mean the "good" texts will not be released unless this civil matter reaches the point where both sides are doing discovery?
If so, then I am guessing Rackner released these texts knowing they could not be addressed by TH unless the divorce/custody/RO was at the point where Rackner could also be subpoenaing doctors, mental health professionals, former co-workers, etc. who had negative things to say about TH.
If so, then I am guessing Rackner released these texts knowing they could not be addressed by TH unless the divorce/custody/RO was at the point where Rackner could also be subpoenaing doctors, mental health professionals, former co-workers, etc. who had negative things to say about TH.
See BeanE's post #414 on this thread for reference. Terri's lawyers received the text messages from LE just as Kaine and his lawyer did.
No. Someone in LE may have told him that, so, in that sense, the statement may be true. I'm saying that unless something unprecedented and highly irregular has occured here, there is no conceivable scenario under which more than one circuit court judge would have determined probable cause exists to implicate Terri in Kyron's disappearance and in the murder for hire plot.
In our system, the first time a judge makes such a determination is in connection with the issuance of the arrest warrant. If there is a second time, it would occur after the arrest when the accused seeks to have the indictment overturned or the charges dismissed. So when someone says there has been more than one judge making a determination as to probable cause for criminal culpability before there has been an arrest, that's a WTF moment.
loves2bmom
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2010
- Messages
- 995
- Reaction score
- 81
Yes, that's what I thought Citigirl was asking and that's what I want to know.
gitana1
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- May 31, 2005
- Messages
- 29,365
- Reaction score
- 229,754
I don't do criminal but don't you need probable cause for a search warrant? My understanding was that searching text messages, for bat phones, etc., all necessitated warrants that require probable cause. I kind of figured that's what Kaine was referring to - multiple circuit judges for multiple search warrants. Help me out!! TIA.