CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #9

[katydid23]

There has been more coverage of this trial than any other I've followed in California. Not quite sure what you mean.

I have a different experience. I feel like this case is getting much less coverage then recent murder trials in California, that come to mind.

The Scott Peterson trial was like 24/7 nonstop coverage. And more recently, the IslA Vista Killing in 2014, major coverage by the press and on tv/radio. Sierra LamAr's murder trial did not get enough coverage, imo, but it still got more that this one has.

 

[missy1974]

But I have watched the videos, and seen solid points made by the Pros, and she doesn't mention them. But does tweet about the cross examination highlights.

She was slacking with tweets the last few weeks. The last few days, I think she is getting a run down from someone else (likely the person that gave her the audio tapes). But I did say last week that I don't think Cathy thinks the State is proving it either. Unfortunately, this is what we get.. cuz no one else is doing it.

 

[missy1974]

What I learned in Day 23 Part 4:


I learned what a "flyer" is ... basically when a cell phone chooses a cell tower WAY further away than seems necessary.


McGee shows this example:


2/10 12:37pm - in Rancho Cucamonga


one minute later:


2/10 12:38pm - in Riverside Lake Mathews area 18 miles from CM's home.


He then talks about the 9:32pm Feb 4th call on Merritt's records. It hit in the Mira Loma area, near the corner of Van buren Blvd and Bellegrave Ave. When looking at this in the maps that we were able to see in Bole's testimony on Thursday, I would have said he wasn't home for sure. When looking at it now, knowing about the 10th call hitting a tower in the Lake Mathews area of Riverside, not so sure anymore. I have attached a map, which includes all of the above places mentioned, with the red dot being that intersection near where the tower was for 9:32pm Feb 4th 2010. (I'm not good at judging distances, but the tower it hit on the 10th from what I understand from only hearing testimony, knowing he was most likely at home at the time, is further than the tower it hit on the 4th IMO)


Biggest thing I learned, after listening to over 10 minutes of McGee going through VM calls from Jan/Feb... Calls that go to Voicemail on AT&T NEVER record a tower. So VM calls that don't show any tower information, means nothing.

I have not listened to all of his re-cross. But before I stopped, he had this exchange with the prosecutor:

All of those went to vm didn't they? correct.

All of them show no cell tower data information, correct? That's correct.

What does that indicate to you based on your training experience? As I stated on direct, based on my training, is that the phone could be off the network, off, on airplane mode, however, based on cross examination, I would like to confer with AT&T to give a more accurate answer.

 

[missy1974]

Listening to all of this tower info without seeing the maps.......sucks! LOL

 

[dlkutac]

Biggest thing I learned, after listening to over 10 minutes of McGee going through VM calls from Jan/Feb... Calls that go to Voicemail on AT&T NEVER record a tower. So VM calls that don't show any tower information, means nothing.

I have not listened to all of his re-cross. But before I stopped, he had this exchange with the prosecutor:

All of those went to vm didn't they? correct.

All of them show no cell tower data information, correct? That's correct.

What does that indicate to you based on your training experience? As I stated on direct, based on my training, is that the phone could be off the network, off, on airplane mode, however, based on cross examination, I would like to confer with AT&T to give a more accurate answer.

The prosecution has dropped the ball so many times now. It's almost like they put their case together assuming there would be no rebuttal whatsoever.

 

[missy1974]

What I learned in Day 23 Part 4:


I learned what a "flyer" is ... basically when a cell phone chooses a cell tower WAY further away than seems necessary.


McGee shows this example:


2/10 12:37pm - in Rancho Cucamonga


one minute later:


2/10 12:38pm - in Riverside Lake Mathews area 18 miles from CM's home.


He then talks about the 9:32pm Feb 4th call on Merritt's records. It hit in the Mira Loma area, near the corner of Van buren Blvd and Bellegrave Ave. When looking at this in the maps that we were able to see in Bole's testimony on Thursday, I would have said he wasn't home for sure. When looking at it now, knowing about the 10th call hitting a tower in the Lake Mathews area of Riverside, not so sure anymore. I have attached a map, which includes all of the above places mentioned, with the red dot being that intersection near where the tower was for 9:32pm Feb 4th 2010. (I'm not good at judging distances, but the tower it hit on the 10th from what I understand from only hearing testimony, knowing he was most likely at home at the time, is further than the tower it hit on the 4th IMO)

In regard's to the "flyer" call... I still have it playing but not intently listening lol Prosecutor (whoever it is??? Daugherty/Imes sound the same IMO LOL)

He makes the point that the 4th 9:32pm call, there are no other calls around it showing he was at home, like it does on the example from the 10th.

 

[missy1974]

The prosecution has dropped the ball so many times now. It's almost like they put their case together assuming there would be no rebuttal whatsoever.

Yeah, I just absorbed a ton of info, horrible without the maps. The VM thing is pretty significant IMO It not only has an impact on the 4th, but the 8th as well. He had 1 call that went to VM, no tower info, and this is when the pro's say he took the Trooper down to the border. And let's face it... the prosecution has been going with the "he had his phone off" during that time all these years. No one thought to check the rest of the records??? call up AT&T and ask???

I notice that they didn't ask Boles to get clarification overnight like they did with their Accountant and the cash withdrawals. I think this was something that if McGee is wrong, and Boles is right, they would want to have that cleared up pretty quick, but nope. I guess they can recall him later, but I wouldn't want that left 'out there'.

I have a feeling that the defense cell phone expert witness is probably one of the guys that trains the FBI guys in those seminar's that Boles was testifying about

 

[Niner]

Wednesday, February 27th:
*Trial continues (Day 25) (@ 9:30am PT) - CA - McStay Family: Joseph (40), Summer (43), Gianni (4) & Joey Jr (3) (Feb. 4, 2010, Fallbrook; found Nov. 11, 2013) - *Charles "Chase" Ray Merritt (57/now 60) arrested (11/5/14) & indicted (11/7/14) of 4 counts of murder with special circumstance; plead not guilty. DP case.
12 jurors & 6 alternates were finalized on Tuesday (12/11/18). 8 women & 4 men, while the alternates include 4 men & 2 women. Trial started 1/7/19. Dark on Fridays.
Skipping Day 1 (1/7/19) thru 6 (1/15/19) – reference post #1180 here: CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #2
Skipping Day 7 (1/16/19) thru 11 (1/24/19) – reference post #1119 here: CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #3
Skipping Day 12 (1/28/19) thru 14 (1/31/19) - reference post #217 here: CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #5
Skipping Day 15 (2/5/19) thru 17 (2/7/19) - reference post #648 here: CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #6
Skipping Day 18 (2/13/19) thru Day 20 (2/19/19) - reference post #6 here: CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #8
2/20/19 Day 21: State witnesses: Donald Thomas Jones continued on stand. April Coronado, fraud investigator for Union bank (in 2010). Scott Weitzman, forensic accountant, certified fraud examiner. Trial continues on 2/21.
2/21/19 Day 22: State witnesses: Scott Weitzman, forensic accountant returns to the stand for cross examination. Subject to recall. Ryan Smith (phone records of Chase & Joseph’s discussed). Kevin Boles, Special Agent with FBI (phone pings). Trial continues Monday, 2/25.
2/25/19 Day 23: State witness: FBI Special Agent Kevin Boles regarding the cell phone/tower records. Boles will return tomorrow (2/26) for cross examination.
2/26/19 Day 24: States witnesses: FBI Special Agent Kevin Boles on cross exam. Det. Edward Bachman (recalled to stand). Trial continues to 2/27 will only have morning session as a juror has a prior commitment.

 

[MsFacetious]

This is a very complicated forensic case. There is simply no way to adequately prepare for a case like this, in less than a few years. Most DP cases take this long, or longer to get to trial.

Absolutely, I agree. It would have been absurd to expect either side to be prepared 3 years ago. There's just no way that's possible. The two cases I'm referencing are not even murder cases. Yet 4 years isn't an unreasonable average for them going to trial either. There is SO MUCH that goes into trial prep. It just takes a very long time.

 

[missy1974]

Maybe the records did show a tower for VM's left sometimes, but very very rarely... this is from re-cross...

Feb 3/10 the towers before that call (5:01 call I believe), 2 minutes before.. what towers were utilized? home towers

5:01 call from CJ left VM, has cell tower data. 2 minutes later, CJ again, no cell tower data, 2 minutes later, JM leaving vm with no cell data, 16 minutes later, vm left, no cell data, 12 minutes after that, outgoing call to collect his VM.

Based on this, can you say whether or not the the phone is off, or if he has bad coverage when he's home? objection/overruled
At this point, I would like to confer with AT&T before I answer that.

McGee asked him about whether he got the transcripts from Merritt's interview... McGee is confused lol but asks him if he received the part of the conversation where he was receiving calls from Cathy? He doesn't recall reading that one.

I have mentioned this more than once. I think it took 3 tries before they could actually talk. Their phone service sucked.

 

[Tortoise]

In the overall scheme of things the cell phone evidence, on or off, doesn't assist his defense.

If Cathy is calling him between 6pm and 9.30 pm on the 4th (unless she works evenings) I think the jury is going to infer she was home with the children and he was not home.

Even if she lied for him when she alibied him, or didn't lie but couldn't remember that night in particular when he asked her what they were doing on Thursday 4th, she didn't say she was working or she works Thursday evenings. For Cathy to be calling him for 3 hours in the evening with children and him to still be not with her at 9.30 pm means they were not together and the only reasonable inference is that he was not at home.

He is still left with no alibi for key times, whether they can show his phone was on or off.

Neither is the "flyer" evidence going to prove he wasn't in Victorville. He made multiple calls and hit more than one tower there. He made zero calls to Joey that day when he would later tell Carmen he'd tried to get hold of Joey all weekend. So he was lying about it the day after, never mind poor memory.

Thankfully truth has its own special way of shining through, because what really happened is fact and can't be changed however many smoke bombs they chuck at it. It's back to the pretzels. Take away the phone evidence or leave it in, he's still not alibied. Unless you're prepared to write off the cumulative effect of the incriminating evidence as just being mountains of bad luck for Chase. IMO.

 

[itsbrookie]

Hmmm....who is close to CM that he might ask to send him screenshot of searches? A girlfriend or relative?

I really hope that at some stage we get to find out the relevancy of the DNA swab being taken from Chase's brother.

 

[Tortoise]

How do we know he didn't take the screenshots himself, is there evidence it was sent to him?

 

[itsbrookie]

How do we know he didn't take the screenshots himself, is there evidence it was sent to him?

Because Bachman stated that he doesn't know how they ended up on Chase's phone, so it seems possible at this stage that they were sent from another device.
JMO

ETA: also, some screenshots were taken on an iPad, so those ones definitely had to have been sent to the phone. By whom, that's the question.

 

[Tortoise]

[bbm]

very interesting ... can you elaborate on the part I bolded?

I have a keen interest in and research statement analysis techniques used to train law enforcement in interviewing skills.

If I can just show one example extracted from Chase's interview on Feb 17th with my own interpretation:

CM: I’ve never talked, before this, this happened to Joseph, I’d never, never talked to Dan ever.

He states something happened to Joey. What's important here is what he doesn't state, the expected, that Joey possibly went off, of his own accord. So I'm expecting him to state 'before Joseph disappeared'. It's not only about detecting lying, because people don't like lying and avoid it if they can to avoid the tells, so it's focusing on what statements reveal. Speech is very fast and automatic and it reveals what our knowledge is, often with unintentional leakage.

He then goes on to say -

Didn’t even, I mean I knew of his existence, I knew his role in Joseph’s business, I knew um that Joseph was almost, had almost paid him off and I think he was paying him $50,000 for his part of the business, I think that was the number..

He doesn't say has. He's stating knowledge that Joey is dead.

Another example I quoted yesterday was Chase saying he thought Joey paid for lunch by card and they could look that up. They would have had no need to doubt he met Chase for lunch at that stage so he revealed the possibility and I believe likelihood that he didn't meet Joey, because he had even given consideration to alibiing himself.

 

[Tortoise]

Because Bachman stated that he doesn't know how they ended up on Chase's phone, so it seems possible at this stage that they were sent from another device.
JMO

ETA: also, some screenshots were taken on an iPad, so those ones definitely had to have been sent to the phone. By whom, that's the question.

Thanks. Could it have been his own ipad?

 

[itsbrookie]

Thanks. Could it have been his own ipad?

Yes definitely, is it known whether or not he owned one?

 

[Emi]

I have a different experience. I feel like this case is getting much less coverage then recent murder trials in California, that come to mind.

The Scott Peterson trial was like 24/7 nonstop coverage. And more recently, the IslA Vista Killing in 2014, major coverage by the press and on tv/radio. Sierra LaMar's murder trial did not get enough coverage, imo, but it still got more that this one has.

Totally agree with you Erin Corwin trial which was local to San Bernardino got more coverage then this one, Sierra's case got way more tweets and also news civcover I know this cause I am local to her case

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Probably. Most of her tweets highlight points made by the defense, imo.

Is there anyone else tweeting? I notice she seems to tweet about the defense more often.

Is she a reporter? If so, she should make sure she tweets both sides equally. Even if she isnt, she needs to tweet both sides fairly.

I remember another case when we had to rely on tweets from one reporter. Everyone was upset thinking the DA was getting beat like a drum throughout. I remember many were worried justice wouldn't be served for the victim because she constantly tweeted what was being said by the defense on cross.

We were all shocked how quickly the guilty verdict came back in because we had relied on her tweets to be fair, and balanced of what really had been said. It was all a sham, and totally biased.

It was learned later on she was in the pocket of the defense all along, and was close friends with one of them.

I want to know both sides, and what was testified to under direct, and under cross. I'm perfectly capable of understanding what the evidence means, submitted by both sides.

Imo

 

[JMarsh]

Absolutely, I agree. It would have been absurd to expect either side to be prepared 3 years ago. There's just no way that's possible. The two cases I'm referencing are not even murder cases. Yet 4 years isn't an unreasonable average for them going to trial either. There is SO MUCH that goes into trial prep. It just takes a very long time.

I agree. And especially when the client is not uber rich. OJ might have been able to pay his attorneys enough that they had the luxury of working only on his case, and only his case. (And even with that case, which wasn't a death penalty case, it probably took some time to get to trial.) But I feel certain Chase's attorneys have other cases than just his. Actually, I know this for a fact. And the DA has the advantage that they generated the evidence, so they know that evidence in a way that the defense can't-until the defense catches up, which again, can take years, given the volume of evidence generated here.