CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #14

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok... I found this post from Bessie (WS Administrator) in the old "Chase Merritt" Thread. It might provide some answers.

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/chase-merritt-2.231004/page-55#post-10249042

Yes, his percentage included cost of materials and supplies. However, JM fronted that portion throughout the year. At the end of the year, JM reconciled the account to show what was due back to EIP from CM.

I'd like to see a written agreement between the two if it exists. JM must have agreed to cover the materials up front, and recoup them later from CM.

CM received 65% off the top on most of the jobs listed, but that included the cost of materials. On some jobs, he received as little as 20%. Perhaps those were the drop shipped fountains. His net percentage is 52%, from which the costs of materials would be deducted.


Total Sales -- 297954
CM's cut -- 158210
less: costs -- - 42873
% costs -- approx 14%
CM's net -- 115337
CM % -- approx 39%
JM/EIP -- 139744
JM/EIP % -- approx 47%
 
And this, also from Bessie:

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/chase-merritt-2.231004/page-56#post-10250607

He didn't actually pay for them, but he was responsible for the cost. That must have been part of the agreement between the two.

CM was paid a percentage to complete the jobs. For most jobs, it was a straight 65%. From that 65%, CM was to cover materials and supplies. How do I know that? JM tells us so.

(I apologize for the way this looks. The post editor makes it impossible to align text properly. ARggghhh!!)

Disbursements 11/7/8-1/28/10: $169,754
plus: other materials, granite: 3,500
Total paid to vendors and CM: $173, 255

Due to CM (see "jobs" schedule): $158,210
Actual pd to (or on behalf of) CM: -173,255
Difference: Overpaid by EIP/JM: - $ 15,045

Before anyone jumps to conclusions, this doesn't mean that JM went to CM with an invoice for $15,045 due in cash immediately. It's quite possible the overpayment would be expensed over the course of the following year, 2010. It's also possible the arrangement was agreed upon because CM's history affected his ability to get a line of credit with the vendors. But if JM liked him, and liked his work well enough, he might have made the concession to carry the cost up front. Not exactly kosher, but not all that unusual, either.
 
One more from Bessie:

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/chase-merritt-2.231004/page-56#post-10252677

"Owed", "due", either would work to describe the agreed upon amount CM would be paid to complete the respective jobs. I'm pretty sure JM prepared this schedule to go over with CM when they sat down together to "settle up". (On one entry he's made a note, "split with you".)

The $169,754 figure begins with an entry on 11/07/08 for an $870 water unit, and includes everything listed afterward. $108,773 is part of the $169k, and includes all disbursements listed between 2/13/09 and 1/28/10. (Look at where JM has underlined.) Only a small portion of $108k is an "overpayment".

The "check payments" (entries without descriptions) for the most part can be matched up to the allotted amounts per job. It's not easy to see because the payments weren't made in lump sums. Take for instance, the first job listed. CM's portion is $8534. But we don't see a payment to CM for $8534. However if you add the first two, 8534 + 5785 = 14,319. Then add the checks without descriptions 10/17-12/30, and you'll find they equal 14,319.

Those payments must have gone to CM, but in addition, JM paid for other things, and that's where the "overpaid" part comes in. Again assuming the entries with no detail were payments to CM, he actually received in total, $126,181, not $158,210. But the difference was made up by the costs and expenses JM paid directly (43,573 + 3500), which resulted in the $15k overpayment.
 
IMO, she paints a pretty good picture with just her email communication to Joey. She specifically says she wants to see how the logo will be placed Joseph's response is essentially, "Yes, we will get it to you, but we still need full payment". She also asks how can it be ready for install when she hasn't approved the final design.

It's also possible she didn't trust Joseph as much as she didn't trust/like Chase. She wasn't confidant with the direction things were going, couldn't get a hold of Chase and as a designer, had her fair share of dealing with worthless contractors and getting screwed in the end. This was her daughter's restaurant afterall.
 
But my original point was if you didn’t have this extracurricular (so to speak) knowledge, would you be able to connect the dots with what the prosecution has presented? That I wish their presentation was better organized. Heck, even their witnesses seem unprepared half the time. Between that and it being a completely circumstantial case, I just don’t know if the jurors will completely understand the strength of the evidence against him.

That was my original musing. Then you said you don’t partake in any blogs or forums and I said, “Yes you do. You’re here.”

Being here, or anywhere on the internet, allows us insight and knowledge that make it easier to see CM as guilty in this case. The jurors don’t have that (nor should they) and that makes the case, as it stands now, not so slam dunk. IMO.

I think this case will be won or lost by the State during the rebuttal

They will either be able to rebut the defense case and put their own case out there on an organized fashion or they wont
 
I think this case will be won or lost by the State during the rebuttal

They will either be able to rebut the defense case and put their own case out there on an organized fashion or they wont

It is said that juries make up their mind in the first 30 minutes. However, I think that it's more likely during rebuttal.

It's frustrating from the defense side that we only get that one bite at the apple... while the state gets two. Especially when there is SO much at stake on our side. Yes I understand WHY, but it's frustrating.

I have zero clue what's going on in this case as my trial starts tomorrow. However, this comment caught my attention. Just because that's so my fear with our trial. 100% Innocent guy. Facing life in prison. What if the state DOES somehow rebut our case? Ugh. Sometimes our system really sucks.

I think I'm better off as a websleuther where I don't have a direct impact on the outcome!

See you all in a couple of weeks. :rolleyes:
 
It is said that juries make up their mind in the first 30 minutes. However, I think that it's more likely during rebuttal.

It's frustrating from the defense side that we only get that one bite at the apple... while the state gets two. Especially when there is SO much at stake on our side. Yes I understand WHY, but it's frustrating.

I have zero clue what's going on in this case as my trial starts tomorrow. However, this comment caught my attention. Just because that's so my fear with our trial. 100% Innocent guy. Facing life in prison. What if the state DOES somehow rebut our case? Ugh. Sometimes our system really sucks.

I think I'm better off as a websleuther where I don't have a direct impact on the outcome!

See you all in a couple of weeks. :rolleyes:

I’m a bit confused. I thought that, in California, anyway, the defense got to rebut the rebuttal, so to speak... and on and on...
 
Ok... I found this post from Bessie (WS Administrator) in the old "Chase Merritt" Thread. It might provide some answers.

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/chase-merritt-2.231004/page-55#post-10249042

Yes, his percentage included cost of materials and supplies. However, JM fronted that portion throughout the year. At the end of the year, JM reconciled the account to show what was due back to EIP from CM.

I'd like to see a written agreement between the two if it exists. JM must have agreed to cover the materials up front, and recoup them later from CM.

CM received 65% off the top on most of the jobs listed, but that included the cost of materials. On some jobs, he received as little as 20%. Perhaps those were the drop shipped fountains. His net percentage is 52%, from which the costs of materials would be deducted.

Total Sales -- 297954
CM's cut -- 158210
less: costs -- - 42873
% costs -- approx 14%
CM's net -- 115337
CM % -- approx 39%
JM/EIP -- 139744
JM/EIP % -- approx 47%

Thanks @Cricket28 for finding these! This along with your other posts you found, is how I have thought this was done. I'm unsure of how bessie figured out the "costs", but will go back and have a look in those threads.
 
It is said that juries make up their mind in the first 30 minutes. However, I think that it's more likely during rebuttal.

It's frustrating from the defense side that we only get that one bite at the apple... while the state gets two. Especially when there is SO much at stake on our side. Yes I understand WHY, but it's frustrating.

I have zero clue what's going on in this case as my trial starts tomorrow. However, this comment caught my attention. Just because that's so my fear with our trial. 100% Innocent guy. Facing life in prison. What if the state DOES somehow rebut our case? Ugh. Sometimes our system really sucks.

I think I'm better off as a websleuther where I don't have a direct impact on the outcome!

See you all in a couple of weeks. :rolleyes:

Nice to "see" you @MsFacetious ... was wondering where you were! LOL you have not missed much in this trial, LOTS of time off... ridiculous amount of time off... and if you can believe it, I think we might only see a half day of testimony this upcoming week and then off until the 3rd!!! Your trial might be over before this one even starts back up :eek:

Hope all goes well in your trial!
 
And this, also from Bessie:

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/chase-merritt-2.231004/page-56#post-10250607

He didn't actually pay for them, but he was responsible for the cost. That must have been part of the agreement between the two.

CM was paid a percentage to complete the jobs. For most jobs, it was a straight 65%. From that 65%, CM was to cover materials and supplies. How do I know that? JM tells us so.

(I apologize for the way this looks. The post editor makes it impossible to align text properly. ARggghhh!!)

Disbursements 11/7/8-1/28/10: $169,754
plus: other materials, granite: 3,500
Total paid to vendors and CM: $173, 255

Due to CM (see "jobs" schedule): $158,210
Actual pd to (or on behalf of) CM: -173,255
Difference: Overpaid by EIP/JM: - $ 15,045

Before anyone jumps to conclusions, this doesn't mean that JM went to CM with an invoice for $15,045 due in cash immediately. It's quite possible the overpayment would be expensed over the course of the following year, 2010. It's also possible the arrangement was agreed upon because CM's history affected his ability to get a line of credit with the vendors. But if JM liked him, and liked his work well enough, he might have made the concession to carry the cost up front. Not exactly kosher, but not all that unusual, either.

This makes a lot of sense.

Joey was essentially fronting Chase, and would explain why he also paid some costs directly.

But at the end of the day it would all be swept up in the spreadsheet.
 
It's also possible she didn't trust Joseph as much as she didn't trust/like Chase. She wasn't confidant with the direction things were going, couldn't get a hold of Chase and as a designer, had her fair share of dealing with worthless contractors and getting screwed in the end. This was her daughter's restaurant afterall.

What I think is not a very good sign is that in Joey's argument against chargeback he doesn't document the delivery on the contract properly.

This one seems to have been more complicated in that they worked from a 3rd parties designs - but to protect himself he really should have had a signed off design matching what he produced. I suspect this is why he lost the chargeback. He couldn't prove easily that they delivered to the clients spec.
 
It is said that juries make up their mind in the first 30 minutes. However, I think that it's more likely during rebuttal.

It's frustrating from the defense side that we only get that one bite at the apple... while the state gets two. Especially when there is SO much at stake on our side. Yes I understand WHY, but it's frustrating.

I have zero clue what's going on in this case as my trial starts tomorrow. However, this comment caught my attention. Just because that's so my fear with our trial. 100% Innocent guy. Facing life in prison. What if the state DOES somehow rebut our case? Ugh. Sometimes our system really sucks.

I think I'm better off as a websleuther where I don't have a direct impact on the outcome!

See you all in a couple of weeks. :rolleyes:

I am really interesting in this rebuttal stuff as we don't have this in NZ

Typically in NZ each witness is called only once. e.g. it is strange for me that the defence would recall a state witness.
 
Yes, it's going to be extremely unfortunate that we won't have the visuals for the defense experts, audio is better than nothing, however, how do you "hear" what they are showing on the screens? lol

We've actually been fortunate to have any exhibits IMO

In Pistorius the exhibits were handled the old fashioned way be documentation which counsel exhibited and then discussed with the witness - we couldn't see any of it.

This created a nightmare of trying to piece together what key exhibits were. e.g. in once case we discovered an exhibit "proving a crucial call time" was not his phone logs but actually just the witnesses own police statement - LOL!

Another problem is there is bound to be far more stuff exhibited than actually discussed
 
It is said that juries make up their mind in the first 30 minutes. However, I think that it's more likely during rebuttal.

It's frustrating from the defense side that we only get that one bite at the apple... while the state gets two. Especially when there is SO much at stake on our side. Yes I understand WHY, but it's frustrating.

I have zero clue what's going on in this case as my trial starts tomorrow. However, this comment caught my attention. Just because that's so my fear with our trial. 100% Innocent guy. Facing life in prison. What if the state DOES somehow rebut our case? Ugh. Sometimes our system really sucks.

I think I'm better off as a websleuther where I don't have a direct impact on the outcome!

See you all in a couple of weeks. :rolleyes:
I hope you have good luck with your defense case. My father always taught us that the Justice System is dependent upon erveryone’s Right to a strong defense advocate

I think it is amazing that you are doing this work now. It is great for your kids to see as they grow up and see you as their role model

Good luck tomorrow
 
My apologies Mica, I assumed the discussion was a continuance from an earlier post about presumption of innocence until the jury comes to a decision.

I really think posters are just mixing up difference concepts

Hearing all the evidence has to do with procedural propriety and natural justice.

You can do a mind experiment where you look at what would happen if we had presumption of guilt

Under such a system, the prosecution could lead no evidence, and the Jury would find the accused guilty by default unless the defence proved not guilty to the required standard.

Even under that system it would still be a breach of natural justice if the jury ignored key defence evidence - even though guilt is presumed.
 
I really think posters are just mixing up difference concepts

Hearing all the evidence has to do with procedural propriety and natural justice.

You can do a mind experiment where you look at what would happen if we had presumption of guilt

Under such a system, the prosecution could lead no evidence, and the Jury would find the accused guilty by default unless the defence proved not guilty to the required standard.

Even under that system it would still be a breach of natural justice if the jury ignored key defence evidence - even though guilt is presumed.
As quite often becomes the case here, discussions morph once arguments are lost.

That's where the confusion comes in. I'm pretty sure it didn't start out as a post about what this jury must do lol. It started as a response to this post

Good points. Presumption of innocence until all evidence (from both sides) is presented in full and the jury comes to a decision. That’s what our justice system is all about.

JMO
 
But my original point was if you didn’t have this extracurricular (so to speak) knowledge, would you be able to connect the dots with what the prosecution has presented? That I wish their presentation was better organized. Heck, even their witnesses seem unprepared half the time. Between that and it being a completely circumstantial case, I just don’t know if the jurors will completely understand the strength of the evidence against him.

That was my original musing. Then you said you don’t partake in any blogs or forums and I said, “Yes you do. You’re here.”

Being here, or anywhere on the internet, allows us insight and knowledge that make it easier to see CM as guilty in this case. The jurors don’t have that (nor should they) and that makes the case, as it stands now, not so slam dunk. IMO.

Morning, Frankie!

First, I've never seen one prosecutor come out before trial in any case stating their case is a slam dunk.

In fact they have repeatedly said, there is no such thing as a slam dunk case. They are correct.

Imo, that is terminology is often used by the public at large, and not by trial prosecutors.

See I see it much differently than you, and I'm sure others as well. Lol! Now that is a positive reason for being on a trial discussion forum where we can exchange differing points of view.

For the public this case has had nothing, but problems with trying to follow along with the trial evidence. Starting with the live streaming going dark, to very little tweets, edited footage at the end of some days, very little news print articles, and poor audio. On, and on it's gone for the interested public.

However, the jurors have not had to endure or struggle with any of that.

They are present as each single word is testified to being able to watch carefully, making them able to weigh each witness's full testimony. From what the reporters have said the jury is quite attentive taking copious notes throughout.

As a prior juror myself, imo there is simply no comparison when trying to absorb evidence from afar, and being a juror sitting inside of the courtroom absorbing all of the evidence through every second of it.

So rather than it being an advantage for outsiders looking in on any blog discussion site, it's actually a disadvantage. IMHO. So much is lost, but not lost on the jurors. Imo, they've got this.

It's really the jurors who are actually the ones who have the best advantage by far.

I feel very comfortable that this jury is paying very close attention to each piece of CE facts being entered, and will come to the right verdict, based on the compelling evidence they have heard from day one through the end, when both sides will rest.

Jmo
 
i am watching the McStay story on ID right now--- i really am not familiar with the facts of the casc--- for example i did not know who Dan Kavanaugh was- seems like he has a good alibi-he was in Hawaii----

since there was apparently no blood in the home i dont think the
murder was committed there--this was a very brutal and bloody crime
and there seems to be a good circumstantial case against Merritt, as well as
the DNA being found in the Trooper

Cant figure out why the prosecution is going with the home as the crime scene
i think he had a gun and herded them out of the home and killed
them somewhere else

I think Merritt threatened to kill the kids right there in the home in order to get the parents to comply with his orders. I believe the family was killed elsewhere, perhaps where they were found in the desert. Cell phone records seem to also tie him to this crime.

I have been following this threat, but not the trial, how is it going? it would seem to me to be a pretty easy case to prosecute, yet reading this thread, I get the feeling the prosecution has some problems.
 
Last edited:
i am watching the McStay story on ID right now--- i really am not familiar with the facts of the casc--- for example i did not know who Dan Kavanaugh was- seems like he has a good alibi-he was in Hawaii----

since there was apparently no blood in the home i dont think the
murder was committed there--this was a very brutal and bloody crime
and there seems to be a good circumstantial case against Merritt, as well as
the DNA being found in the Trooper

Cant figure out why the prosecution is going with the home as the crime scene
i think he had a gun and herded them out of the home and killed
them somewhere else

I think Merritt threatened to kill the kids right there in the home in order to get the parents to comply with his orders. I believe the family was killed elsewhere, perhaps where they were found in the desert. Cell phone records seem to also tie him to this crime.

I have been following this threat, but not the trial, how is it going? it would seem to me to be a pretty easy case to prosecute, yet reading this thread, I get the feeling the prosecution has some problems.

I flipped it over to ID when I first read your post, ilovewings. I guess different shows are on, depending on each one's own time of day at the time.

I have never been able to catch the McStay case on ID or OWN so I sure hate I missed it again.

As far as believing they were forced out of their home at gunpoint is a good theory.

What is even better is the jurors are legally allowed to have their own theories as well as to where the actual murders may have occurred, and they do not have to be in agreement with each other either.

This is allowed because the state has only offered their theory where they think it happened. Imo their theory is based on all of the CE pieces found at the gravesites. I do think the evidence does support their theory, and can see why they believe it happened inside of their home.

Some jurors may agree with the state's theory, but then others may think it happened else where, like you do.

In the end it really doesn't matter as far as finding guilt or NG of the defendant ,and that is why its permissible for the jurors to have their own held opinions on where it may have happened.

All the jury is there to do is decide one thing only, one way or the other.

And that one question is: Did CM murder all four, regardless of where it may have happened or when it may have happened, or what all may have happened or even why it may have happened.

I do believe the state has proven BARD, he DID commit all four murders. Imo.

It's only the one, 'Did he do it?' question that will be answered by his jury, when they render their final verdict. On this one question, they do have to be unanimous of course.

Imo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
95
Guests online
820
Total visitors
915

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,750
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top