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

[MsFacetious]

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?

This is a very good point. We are using it right now in a case. I believe the witness doesn't remember at all, but is backing up the other witness on basic points to avoid looking inept. Others believe she is outright lying. It's all in how you look at it really.

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

I'm inclined to agree. Although I'm not a fan of the much lengthier judges deliberation. There is also much less to possibly appeal with a bench trial.

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.

Yet, what if Joey had told Chase to get lost like Dan claims he was going to? Would the lack of calls be so odd then? I realize that isn't what Chase is claiming... just a thought.

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)

This is stunning to me. We have to designate our experts, provide a report or the material and designate any rebuttal experts WELL in advance of trial!

In my current case it was done a year in advance because we were intending to go to trial on time but the prosecution keeps delaying. (Yes, that's backwards from normal.)

I guess maybe it's the length of the trial that is making this totally different from what we are used to. It's just so crazy to me that they are hiring or designating experts during trial. Just wow.

It would be great for him to take the stand and believe that CM might have the confidence to do it. But his attorneys are way too smart for that, IMO.

Absolutely, it would be very close to ineffective assistance of counsel to let him testify. There is absolutely no way that is happening.

 

[Alf]

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

You should have seen Joseph's ratings/complaints-- scamming the elderly etc..?

 

[Tortoise]

I have a question for everyone. The call to the QB to cancel the account was first on 2-8-2010 at 2:44pm (IIRC) that day. Can anyone tell me if there is any testimony about the whereabouts of CM on that day at that time when he made the call to QB? Also they show his call at 7:36AM on the 2-8-2010 (shown below), is there any testimony or evidence that tells us where CM was when that call was made?

In my notes I have that he was in Rancho Cucamonga at 7.26 am and again between 1.54 pm and 6.31 pm. This came from the prosecutors opening statement.

 

[JMarsh]

I have a question for everyone. The call to the QB to cancel the account was first on 2-8-2010 at 2:44pm (IIRC) that day. Can anyone tell me if there is any testimony about the whereabouts of CM on that day at that time when he made the call to QB? Also they show his call at 7:36AM on the 2-8-2010 (shown below), is there any testimony or evidence that tells us where CM was when that call was made?

This is all we know on page Prelim 91-92

28 Q Okay. Now, turning your attention to February 8th, what
92
1 did your analysis of the defendant's records that day reveal?
2 Well, let me ask you this, 'cause we are, we're drawing
3 near on lunchtime.
4 Between 7:36 A.M. and 1:31 P.M., is there any activity on
5 the defendant's --
6 A Between 7:36 and 1:31?
7 Q Correct.
8 A There is one, one incoming call that goes to voice mail,
9 does not generate a cell tower, though. So, there's no location
10 information.

Feb 9th
A At 2:44 P.M., it stated the user canceled QuickBooks

3 online subscription.

4 Q Do you know if that was done via phone call or online?

5 A It was through a call-intake center. It was done on a

6 phone call.

7 Q And did you review the defendant's cell phone records

8 from that date, February 8th, 2010?

9 A Yes, I did.

10 Q At around that time, was there a phone call to QuickBooks

11 online?

12 A Yes, there was.

13 Q And how long does that, how long did that call last?

14 A The phone call lasted 107 minutes.

15 Q The next day, February 9th, was there any other activity

16 on the QuickBooks account?

17 A Yes.

18 Q And what happened on February 9th, based on your review

19 of the records?

20 A At 8:06, 08:06 A.M., it stated: "The user again

21 cancelled QuickBooks online subscription."

22 Q Did anything else happen that day, February 9th?

23 A Yes, there was customer service notes placed on the

24 account.

Chase pings towers in Rancho when he writes the checks earlier that afternoon. I don't recall any mention of towers pinged during this specific call, but since it isn't mentioned it seems reasonable to assume that Chase pinged those same towers then. I think we will find out.

 

[MsFacetious]

The more I have come to know the details of the case (and I have come late to it) the more i am convinced the critical question is not how the crime scene was staged but why.

What's the reason to put the bodies in a shallow grave and put the Trooper at the border?

why not just let the bodies be found?

Because there would have been evidence to prove who the killer was.
If there was DNA under the nails, or sexual assault, or fingerprints those would have been easily recoverable.
There would have been less time to steal money as well.

 

[mrjitty]

I'm inclined to agree. Although I'm not a fan of the much lengthier judges deliberation. There is also much less to possibly appeal with a bench trial.

I just love having a judgement to pore over. Jury feels so arbitrary

Absolutely, it would be very close to ineffective assistance of counsel to let him testify. There is absolutely no way that is happening.

That's my feeling. So much risk and so little to gain. Better to run the narrative via counsel, especially with such a crappy judge.

 

[JMarsh]

This is a very good point. We are using it right now in a case. I believe the witness doesn't remember at all, but is backing up the other witness on basic points to avoid looking inept. Others believe she is outright lying. It's all in how you look at it really.




I'm inclined to agree. Although I'm not a fan of the much lengthier judges deliberation. There is also much less to possibly appeal with a bench trial.




Yet, what if Joey had told Chase to get lost like Dan claims he was going to? Would the lack of calls be so odd then? I realize that isn't what Chase is claiming... just a thought.




This is stunning to me. We have to designate our experts, provide a report or the material and designate any rebuttal experts WELL in advance of trial!

In my current case it was done a year in advance because we were intending to go to trial on time but the prosecution keeps delaying. (Yes, that's backwards from normal.)

I guess maybe it's the length of the trial that is making this totally different from what we are used to. It's just so crazy to me that they are hiring or designating experts during trial. Just wow.




Absolutely, it would be very close to ineffective assistance of counsel to let him testify. There is absolutely no way that is happening.

Missy, the person the state JUST hired isn't exactly analyzing Chase's expenses, he is simply presenting a spread sheet of some kind--at least this is what seemed to be the case.

The only published log of Joey's calls ends on Feb. 4, so we don't really know yet what the call pattern was following the 4th. We've only been given snippets.

 

[JMarsh]

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.

Absolutely. I agree 100%.

 

[Tortoise]

deleted

 

[Mica]

Missy, the person the state JUST hired isn't exactly analyzing Chase's expenses, he is simply presenting a spread sheet of some kind--at least this is what seemed to be the case.

The only published log of Joey's calls ends on Feb. 4, so we don't really know yet what the call pattern was following the 4th. We've only been given snippets.

Wait, the state JUST HIRED an accountant expert? It wasn’t done prior to trial?

 

[JMarsh]

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.

In a case where direct evidence is given, say, a co-defendant testifies against the other defendant, or there is an eye-witness to the crime, you might be able to make a decision of guilt almost solely on the testimony of that person. That person's credibility might be the only other consideration (unless there is contradictory evidence, like a video showing that the defendant was somewhere else when the crime took place or there is an alibi witness).

In a circumstantial case, the totality of the evidence has to be factored in, and this is especially true in a case like this where there is no smoking gun.

 

[JMarsh]

Wait, the state JUST HIRED an accountant expert? It wasn’t done prior to trial? View attachment 169477

YES! And I don't know if the witnesses "expertise" is really going to be tested. I think they are just presenting a balance sheet. I guess we'll see.

 

[JMarsh]

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

The overpayment was in the 42k amount. The 173 was just a figure used to arrive at that amount. Someone here did a great job of transcribing the DA's opening. I don't have the link handy, but that is a very useful reference.

 

[Tortoise]

deleted

 

[Longtimenoc]

It would be great for him to take the stand and believe that CM might have the confidence to do it. But his attorneys are way too smart for that, IMO.

Remember when Merritt wanted to represent himelf? Wonder what he disagreed with his attorneys about back then? Maybe this very issue

 

[MsFacetious]

I just love having a judgement to pore over. Jury feels so arbitrary

That's my feeling. So much risk and so little to gain. Better to run the narrative via counsel, especially with such a crappy judge.

Absolutely but it's sure a difficult decision to make. Bench or jury?
The judgment is nice to have but not if it didn't go in your clients favor! With a jury you only need 1. With a judge you only have one.
Can you tell we are debating this in a case right now?

In he said/she said the risk of the defendant testifying can be justified. Without a live complaining witness here, I see no advantage. I can see Chase insisting on it but if he does his counsel will make that very clear.

 

[Edmo]

Remember when Merritt wanted to represent himelf? Wonder what he disagreed with his attorneys about back then? Maybe this very issue

IMO, it seems like CM knew the system and fired his attorneys to postpone his trial as long as he possibly could. Witnesses die, evidence get lost etc . . . People's memories fade. He is a 2x Parolee and KNOWS how the Ca Court System works, IMO.

The longest trial delay I have witnessed was 3 years for a murder. It was a carjacking where the victim was drug to death by the vehicle being jacked.

 

[dlkutac]

@HelenK You made a comment on the last thread that Chase might have been here grabbing screenshots of pics that were floating around in the old threads... I could see that!

I recall at one time there were phone records, I think we even had some financial information, not sure if it was here or not though. I know I can still find some of this stuff, including some paypal screenshots and emails, the problem I have... is we don't know if they are authentic or not! Will be interesting to see all of that in the trial!

Are we allowed to know the member name of the poster who was suspected to be Chase, and are his posts still there? I assume you are talking about posts on the private McStay forum. Sorry I cannot attach this to HelenK's post now.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The original poster was talking about RD vs All Doubt (No doubt about the crime/suspect). With technology now, it seems 1/2 the world have video systems and record their lives to upload, lol.

True, maybe in the future many more cases will be solved by video showing how it happened, and by whom. In recent years video footage is playing such an important role in solving cases, although most of the cases I see on ID or OWN it is crimes that happened outside of the home.

I truly wish Joey did have a secreted camera inside of his home that CM knew nothing about.

If so, CM wouldnt have been able to walk around scot free for years to victimize others bilking them also out of thousands. Imo, Joey, and his family maybe would have been discovered much quicker.

I think if Joey did have camera footage inside of his home, LE would have started searching for their bodies in areas CM would feel were his personal comfort zones.

He did exactly like so many other murderers like him have done by discarding the victims bodies in areas they feel comfortable being in.

But sadly, in this case, it is what it is, and defendants have been discovered for decades, and brought to justice based on good old detective work where they were able to amass an overwhelming amount of CE to put them away.

Imo

 

[LadyL]

The more I have come to know the details of the case (and I have come late to it) the more i am convinced the critical question is not how the crime scene was staged but why.

What's the reason to put the bodies in a shallow grave and put the Trooper at the border?

why not just let the bodies be found?

maybe there was a master plan to keep the business running for Joey, who 'went to Mexico with his family'