CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #7

[JMarsh]

I don't understand the question. Presumption of innocence is the same in every criminal case. Burden is on the prosecution.

OK. I think I understand.

I've worked with a lot of attorneys. I'm not one, but that might be why I sound a little attorney-ish to some people. And my experience is that usually attorneys are very cautious in coming to a determination about anything, until they have viewed all the evidence. In fact, sometimes it can be maddening because they won't commit to a view until they have read and heard every. single. piece. of evidence.

But you seem firmly committed to Chase being guilty, and we are only a month into trial. And some assertions the DA made originally have proven a little wobbly.

I am curious to know how you reconcile a determination of guilt this early in the trial, with the core tenets of due process, i.e hear all the evidence, both sides must be heard & presumption of innocence.

 

[JMarsh]

I’m not as well informed on this trial as many of the dedicated members are. But did the state also hire a forensic accountant to review the financials or are they relying on testimony from the detectives?

They did. And according to defense opening statements the DA's assertions about monies owed are mistaken.

 

[JMarsh]

It is evidence. But not testimony that can be tested under x

The trouble is CM lied in that interview and police did not have the information they have now

Are we absolutely certain Chase lied? You are an attorney, you know that the assertion that he lied has to be proven. That's why perjury is so hard to prosecute, because the DA has to show that the person knew they were lying that they weren't just mis-remembering.

In your estimation, what proves that any of what Chase stated in that interview was a deliberate lie?

 

[Mony Mony]

Re: due process and presumption of innocence....

I am not on the jury. I am not an attorney. I am not a judge. I am a private citizen that has eyes to read and ears to hear and a brain to formulate an opinion on this trial. Luckily, CM guilt or innocence is not going to be legally determined by random posters on Websleuths. I am thankful for our legal process and we don't live in a vigilante society. But that doesn't mean we as citizens cannot form an opinion.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I would agree, as evidence is presented, that presumption of innocence will be impacted, but wouldn't it be important to the concept of due process, to hear all the evidence before coming to a determination?

Isn't a fair trial predicated on the belief that it is only with the totality of the evidence that we can make a fair and impartial determination as to guilt?

Of course, but the presumption is going to erode at some point once damaging evidence, that is opposite of innocence is being heard, even though no one is ever really declared innocent in any criminal trial.

Human brains process information at the time it enters their brains...not afterwards. There is simply no way to block it out. Do we use our brains this way in our daily lives? Of course not. Being jurors doesn't turn them into computers or robots that can be turned off at anytime.

If that were the case deliberations would take forever,and forever, yet many verdicts have come back very quickly, not even requiring much deliberation, because they had already processed everything one way or the other, from beginning to end, as it was being entered.

In the end, they will link it all in its totality when rendering their decision, whatever it may be.

It shows the jury was processing the testimonies throughout as they heard each one.

At anytime throughout the case, based on the evidence the jury can be swayed one way or the other back, and forth.

As for due process, I'm not sure what you mean. CM has a right to a fair trial, and imo he is certainly getting one.

He has two highly qualified death penalty lawyers. He has a judge who has bent over backwards by still allowing the DT to ask more, and, more improper questions, even though the judge said he was going to start being very tough on them if they continued the same unethical behavior, but he hasn't, and they haven't stopped.

The state is suppose to get a fair trial too since they have the burden of proof.

Imo, I think it's been much more fair for the defense, and they have no burden at all, except trying to muddy the waters.

Imo

 

[mrjitty]

Re: due process and presumption of innocence....

I am not on the jury. I am not an attorney. I am not a judge. I am a private citizen that has eyes to read and ears to hear and a brain to formulate an opinion on this trial. Luckily, CM guilt or innocence is not going to be legally determined by random posters on Websleuths. I am thankful for our legal process and we don't live in a vigilante society. But that doesn't mean we as citizens cannot form an opinion.

The burden of proof is in any event on the state not on the jurors

We don't know at what point jurors decide things or change their minds

They need not give reasons. It's a black box.

This is why I prefer judge trials with proper crafted judgements

 

[Longtimenoc]

I would agree, as evidence is presented, that presumption of innocence will be impacted, but wouldn't it be important to the concept of due process, to hear all the evidence before coming to a determination?

Isn't a fair trial predicated on the belief that it is only with the totality of the evidence that we can make a fair and impartial determination as to guilt?

Is "totality of evidence" a way to ease ones conscience if one leans towards proven guilty beyond ALL doubt? Not reasonable doubt but ALL doubt? Any reasonable juror is going to weigh the evidence throughout the course of the trial. In other words, most reasonable people can pick up on this implausible ridiculous defense strategy.

 

[Edmo]

There was an excel spreadsheet that was on-line for awhile as well. Nothing ever to really indicate that large sums of money were owed. From the search warrants it's pretty clear that the only source for information about a large debt owed to Joey by Chase, is coming from Dan K.

The only real debt Chase seems to have incurred during this time period is related to his heart attack. He admits to owing over 100K on that. So what might have been perceived as gambling debt, may actually have been medical bills he was trying to pay off.

In the OS, the Prosecutor claimed CM owed JM around $43K, IIRC

 

[Edmo]

Is "totality of evidence" a way to ease ones conscience if one leans towards proven guilty beyond ALL doubt? Not reasonable doubt but ALL doubt? Any reasonable juror is going to weigh the evidence throughout the course of the trial. In other words, most reasonable people can pick up on this implausible ridiculous defense strategy.

Unless a crime is committed on video, eyewitness testimony and KNOW the suspects, that would pretty much erase any reasonable doubt to me.

 

[Edmo]

Thanks MM.

I know CM is a career conman, and conmen are notorious pathological liars, but some of what he has said is totally bizarre.

He was overpaid by Joey in the tune of a whopping 173K, and then comes up with this whacky story (excuse) that doesn't even make a lick of sense.

It truly shows pathological liars are fully convinced everyone including the police, will buy their outlandish lies without question. Ugh.

I've seen detectives on different shows talk about this very same thing when interviewing murderers. They said the suspects really believed LE would buy it all and always thinking they were much smarter.

Imo

CM KNOWS the "system." A 2x Parolee knows how to "deal" with LE, it will be his lies, if the Pros can prove them that will be his undoing, as well as any physical evidence, IMO

 

[Mony Mony]

IMO, the two-time felon murdered JM over $$. IMO, CM felt like he was getting the short end of the stick with these waterfall deals. He says in the police statement that he was initially doing almost all the production himself and that it "almost killed him". Then he started outsourcing to MSM and got an even smaller piece of the pie.

He prolly thought the "running tab" would be forgiven. He packed and repacked the pod, he built a shed for Joey, etc. In his mind, he prolly subtracted his labor cost for those odd jobs out of the running total.

He then prolly somehow got wind of Joey's bank balance and got mad. He felt entitled to that money, so he took some. Then got caught.

All MOO, IMO, etc etc. I have no proof of this so don't ask. Just my opinion.

 

[Mica]

They did. And according to defense opening statements the DA's assertions about monies owed are mistaken.

Thank you JMarsh.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I suspect he will only "testify" via sock puppet attorney

It's too risky to take the stand and better to have his attorney's spout hearsay on his behalf.

Oh gee, Mrjitty, you have now taken my hopes away.

More than anything, I really do hope he is convinced he can hoodwink this jury.

I mean, he does know he has been able to successfully con others for years.

Look how quickly he went onto rook the other two gentlemen out of thousands. It shows he had to be a very great convincing conman.

Imo, CM had a business rating of a F minus minus minus!!! That known record still amazes me. Anyone here where I live with that many RIPOFF complaints would have had their business license pulled, and their business shutdown, rightly so.

Another reason I would like to see him testify is if he is convicted, the appellate issues goes way down when any defendant takes the stand on their own behalf.

Jmo

 

[missy1974]

The difference is I wasn't talking about Chase legally owing money but him paying debts to Metro that clearly existed before Joey was murdered. The inference is there for interpretation and as a juror I would interpret it that way. We've already had the testimony from Carmen that she received the cheques from Chase on Monday or Tuesday and we've seen the backdated cheques to Metro also, raised on the 5th.

I'm not trying to change your opinion, I'm stating mine.

So if he was paying his own debt, why did the cheque come from EIP, why didn't he pay himself and then turn around and write Metro Sheet Metal a cheque from his own account?

We heard ZERO testimony that Chase owed MSM money, so the idea that he did is no longer valid unless the State provides evidence that he did, and we have heard from 2 MSM employees, one of which did the invoicing and handled all incoming cheques.

The basis of your opinion relies on the fact that Chase owed them money (unless I misunderstood), where I have not heard any evidence of that. IF I hear evidence of that, my opinion may change

 

[missy1974]

During the police interview, CM produced a copy of an email Joey sent CM indicating there was an overpayment to CM totalling $173k. CM did some kind of wacky math explaining that he really wasnt overpaid that amount and that there was a "running tab".

I know this isn't definitive proof such as a promissory note, but it does show that at least in Joey's mind, CM has been overpaid.

Surely if there is evidence that he owed him 173K, we should see that. I suspect that we won't, considering even the State doesn't say it was that much. There is indication that there was more than just "emails", there were attatchements to those emails, so it will be interesting to see the big picture

 

[oceanblueeyes]

IMO, the two-time felon murdered JM over $$. IMO, CM felt like he was getting the short end of the stick with these waterfall deals. He says in the police statement that he was initially doing almost all the production himself and that it "almost killed him". Then he started outsourcing to MSM and got an even smaller piece of the pie.

He prolly thought the "running tab" would be forgiven. He packed and repacked the pod, he built a shed for Joey, etc. In his mind, he prolly subtracted his labor cost for those odd jobs out of the running total.

He then prolly somehow got wind of Joey's bank balance and got mad. He felt entitled to that money, so he took some. Then got caught.

All MOO, IMO, etc etc. I have no proof of this so don't ask. Just my opinion.

More, and more, I am beginning to see thousands ($$$$$$) of reasons why he murdered Joey, and his family.


Jmo

 

[missy1974]

I think someone else posted something akin to this next, but here are the contacts between Joey and Chase by way of a phone log that has been on-line for some time (in the three months I have, there is actually not a single day when there is no contact):
Jan:
1 3
2 6
3 14
4 12
5 24
6 12
7 20
8 14
9 12
10 5
11 27
12 31
13 18
14 16
15 10
16 3
17 4
18 13
19 19
20 20
21 18
22 10
23 3
24 8
25 2
26 6
27 7
28 10
29 8
30 6
31 5

Feb
1 19
2 18
3 25
4 14

Thanks for this! I have highlighted in red which days are FRI, SAT, SUN, there is clearly a pattern. For the most part, they didn't speak much on Sat/Sun. At first I was going to reply that this actually shows that the lack of communication after the 4th is telling (which it still is); however, I am not so sure about the lack of communication on the Fri/Sat/Sun would be as telling ... but come Monday, it's definitely out of the ordinary for there not to be a bunch of calls.

 

[missy1974]

The defense has promised they are bringing in a forensic accountant to explain that monetary issue, and that the DA has it wrong. The DA, apparently did not get a forensic accountant to look at this.

We heard on Thursday morning that the State did have a forensic accountant look at Chases finances. (not sure when though? ) The defense was looking for discovery, specifically a report, which they didn't get, they are getting a bunch of paperwork, but no actual report. (Judge said they would give them time to talk with their own expert before cross)

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Surely if there is evidence that he owed him 173K, we should see that. I suspect that we won't, considering even the State doesn't say it was that much. There is indication that there was more than just "emails", there were attatchements to those emails, so it will be interesting to see the big picture

Hi Missy!

Wasn't the quoted amount more to do with his gambling debts he owed Joey?

Yes, we will see, since the state's opening has no bearing on all other evidence that may be introduced during the entire state's case. They may be saving that back for strategic reasons. Like for rebuttal in case CM testifies.

Imo

 

[missy1974]

If I was a juror, it would be a major requirement for me to come in with a presumption of the defendant's innocence. The state would have to prove, step by step, beyond a reasonable doubt, this man's Guilt.

As a bystander, watching from the sidelines, I am looking at things that have not been submitted to the jury, that may have been deemed too prejudicial. I can have my own opinions about the defendant's guilt or innocence.

I think this is the problem I am having with this trial vs what we thought we knew, etc. I decided after that first week to stop looking into the past threads, and since then have been listening to the testimony. Then I see posts that are based off of information that is factually incorrect now or information that has not been shown yet, and it's hard to decipher between fact and fiction. Since this is the trial thread, I wouldn't mind discussing what is coming out in the trial and how it shows guilty or innocence or different explanations for things, but JMO

I can still believe he is guilty AND believe they have not proved that yet, at least to me. I know, I know... lots more to come! ;-)