CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #19

[Tortoise]

Mate I agree it is completely farcical.

There is no way the DK evidence can be allowed without the confession as the confession is the only evidence linking DK to the murder.

When you combine that with the fact the defence always knew about DKs seemingly rock solid alibi evidence, then you have a sabotaging of the trial.

Currently there is simply no evidence at all before the jury on which to base a reasonable possibility DK is the killer.

I think the judge mucked up big time.

I don't know if it can be remedied.

 

[Tortoise]

BBM, I agree as this trial coughs and sputters to the finish line with still no end in sight. How much longer will they keep this charade going i wonder?
What have we had this week one day of Trial? When is it going to resume again i wonder? It's ridiculous IMO.

They're back next Tuesday morning for Rudin, with or without McGee. And then it's time for state's rebuttal and closing arguments. It didn't sound as if the defence even intended to call their PI back to say he looked for Riccobene.

 

[Karinna]

They're back next Tuesday morning for Rudin, with or without McGee. And then it's time for state's rebuttal and closing arguments. It didn't sound as if the defence even intended to call their PI back to say he looked for Riccobene.

Thanks Tortoise. Good to know they're nearly done.
That PI was useless IMO.

 

[mrjitty]

I think the judge mucked up big time.

I don't know if it can be remedied.

I don't think it can be remedied - look at these allegations unsupported by testimony

• she says is Dan Kavanaugh confessed to her that he killed the McStay family.
• Gave a detailed statement of how it occurred, what he did to cover it up, how he did it,
• how he got the family to get out of the house by holding one of the boys at knife point
• She said that Dan Kavanaugh had raped Summer because he wanted revenge for the alienation of the custom business, for cheating him.
• He told her that he buried the sledgehammer and he told her that he was not in Hawaii, that he provided a false alibi.
• She also said that he came back to the house afterward, at some point afterwards, she doesn’t know when, days later, and pretended to be Joseph. Lived the life of pretending to be Joseph for a matter of hours, maybe perhaps overnight, she doesn’t know the exact timeframe he spent in the house.
• Pretended that he was married to Summer.

Then there is this (also from your transcript)

She told us that Dan Kavanaugh is a genius, he’s manipulative and he’s a mastermind. She says that he gave a full detailed confession to her two weeks prior to the day that she met with us but had been hinting at this for many months prior [x]. He refused to come forward which prompted her to go to the FBI initially.

She also relayed that after she came forward, he, she, Dan Kavanaugh began to threaten her, she’s terrified of him, that he has no empathy for others and that’s why he’s capable of doing this, that’s why he was capable of killing these little babies, because he doesn’t actually have empathy for other people. She felt it was her duty to come forward even though she believes that Dan Kavanaugh will harm her. And she requested the prosecutors to give her some type of witness protection. So that’s what Tracey Riccobene said. What follow up do you think they did, with Ms Riccobene? Nothing. Zero

The last point is particularly outrageous - the whole point would be for the jury to evaluate her credibility

I maintain my assertion that this is a highly unethical defence team who have sabotaged the trial via a range of tactics including securing perjury, failing to produce witnesses, and delaying the trial via absurd tactics.

 

[wary]

Thanks Tortoise. Good to know they're nearly done.
That PI was useless IMO.

I wouldn’t say that.... I think the PI accomplished exactly what the defense wanted him to accomplish....

 

[oceanblueeyes]

My concern is that by the judge's third party culpability rulings the defense has been unlawfully allowed to contaminate the state's case with it's opening statement of the confession. They should have been forced to depose her before trial, in case this situation arose where IMO they probably never had any intention of calling her.

From what I understand the law dictates that third party evidence may not be adduced at trial if it is only sufficient to prove motive and there is nothing tying the third party to the murder. It's all well and good saying the state can say defence didn't call their star witness, but how does the court truly fix that jurors heard that and have nothing to weigh her credibility? I think the judge has to talk to the jury about it and tell them outright to disregard DK from their deliberations completely...or do something.

MOO

Morning all!

Let me ask you a question please since I didn't watch the DTs OS.

Did they promise the jury they would be hearing from the confession witness?

If so, imho the jury themselves will rectify the mistake the judge made.

Imo, the jury will dismiss this bit of information that did not come to fruition as promised by the defense.

The jury is filled with humans, and humans expect what has been promised to them to be shown to them through witness testimony. They already know OSs are not evidence of anything nor are they to consider them as such.

Imo, the jury will be highly suspicious as to why this key witness for the defense was a no show.

I believe most of the jurors can figure out they have been played by the defense who failed to live up to what they told them they would produce for them in OS.

Jmo

 

[Karinna]

I wouldn’t say that.... I think the PI accomplished exactly what the defense wanted him to accomplish....

Do you think the jury would find him credible though?

 

[Tortoise]

Morning all!

Let me ask you a question please since I didn't watch the DTs OS.

Did they promise the jury they would be hearing from the confession witness?

If so, imho the jury themselves will rectify the mistake the judge made.

Imo, the jury will dismiss this bit of information that did not come to fruition as promised by the defense.

The jury is filled with humans, and humans expect what has been promised to them to be shown to them through witness testimony. They already know OSs are not evidence of anything nor are they to consider them as such.

Imo, the jury will be highly suspicious as to why this key witness for the defense was a no show.

I believe most of the jurors can figure out they have been played by the defense who failed to live up to what they told them they would produce for them in OS.

Jmo

I'm both with you on this and not.

I don't think it should be left to chance that the jury will piece it together, and they may in particular take some weight merely from the fact that the judge allowed them to hear all this stuff. They might imagine that there are reasons she disappeared, beyond having lied. I don't think the state should have been put in that disadvantaged position, ultimately risking a complete travesty of justice with the killer walking free, when the law exists to protect them from such games.

Having said that, I don't think there's a chance of a not guilty verdict. So either they will think like us that the evidence only points to Merritt and the defense case should be laughed out of court, or there could be a few stragglers who will force a hung jury and there will be a retrial, IMO.

I absolutely do not think the state should have to pay the penalty of having to meet the cost of a lengthy retrial due to some legal inadvertence on the part of the judge. Ultimately though I think a new trial could be completed in half the time or even a quarter of the time without all the DK fluff.

MOO

 

[la2cabo]

I don't think it can be remedied - look at these allegations unsupported by testimony

• she says is Dan Kavanaugh confessed to her that he killed the McStay family.
• Gave a detailed statement of how it occurred, what he did to cover it up, how he did it,
• how he got the family to get out of the house by holding one of the boys at knife point
• She said that Dan Kavanaugh had raped Summer because he wanted revenge for the alienation of the custom business, for cheating him.
• He told her that he buried the sledgehammer and he told her that he was not in Hawaii, that he provided a false alibi.
• She also said that he came back to the house afterward, at some point afterwards, she doesn’t know when, days later, and pretended to be Joseph. Lived the life of pretending to be Joseph for a matter of hours, maybe perhaps overnight, she doesn’t know the exact timeframe he spent in the house.
• Pretended that he was married to Summer.

Then there is this (also from your transcript)



The last point is particularly outrageous - the whole point would be for the jury to evaluate her credibility

I maintain my assertion that this is a highly unethical defence team who have sabotaged the trial via a range of tactics including securing perjury, failing to produce witnesses, and delaying the trial via absurd tactics.

Can the PT bring up her criminal record and drug use? That would certainly blow her credibility.

 

[mrjitty]

Can the PT bring up her criminal record and drug use? That would certainly blow her credibility.

Problem is she didn't take the stand but maline said all of that in front of the jury

 

[Karinna]

Problem is she didn't take the stand but malone said all of that in front of the jury

Can't the PT set the record straight about her in their rebuttal or closing statements to the jury? And how can the jurors take her into consideration as finders of fact if the witness did not take the stand to testify? It is all hearsay then by the DT.

 

[Karinna]

Can the PT bring up her criminal record and drug use? That would certainly blow her credibility.

Did the PT say anything about the witness on cross?

 

[mrjitty]

Can't the PT set the record straight about her in their rebuttal or closing statements to the jury? And how can the jurors take her into consideration as finders of fact if the witness did not take the stand to testify? It is all hearsay then by the DT.

Yes - but the jury is contaminated.

What say the witness is a junkie who invented her testimony? Or maybe DK said it to impress her while they were both high on smack one night?

The jury will never know

Yet this "confession" in all its gory detail, has been spouted forth by Maline as if he were the witness.

The jury should not even know about the DK angle.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I'm both with you on this and not.

I don't think it should be left to chance that the jury will piece it together, and they may in particular take some weight merely from the fact that the judge allowed them to hear all this stuff. They might imagine that there are reasons she disappeared, beyond having lied. I don't think the state should have been put in that disadvantaged position, ultimately risking a complete travesty of justice with the killer walking free, when the law exists to protect them from such games.

Having said that, I don't think there's a chance of a not guilty verdict. So either they will think like us that the evidence only points to Merritt and the defense case should be laughed out of court, or there could be a few stragglers who will force a hung jury and there will be a retrial, IMO.

I absolutely do not think the state should have to pay the penalty of having to meet the cost of a lengthy retrial due to some legal inadvertence on the part of the judge. Ultimately though I think a new trial could be completed in half the time or even a quarter of the time without all the DK fluff.

MOO

I wholeheartedly agree on many aspects you have brought forth.

Imo, its unethical conduct displayed by the defense, and I hope someone files a complaint against them, especially Maline for his misconduct. Imo.

Even private citizens in CA can file a complaint with the ABA. After all the CA taxpayers are the ones having to pay for this trial.

It's true the judge shouldn't have ever allowed this.

He should have made it very clear before allowing third party evidence in they sure better be able to prove it, and make sure they call the witnesses they said they would to support the DK claims they made in OS.

The judge in the Daron Wint quadruple murder trial also gave the DT wide latitude letting them also bring in third party testimony. Another failed SODDI defense. But at least they made a half hearted attempt to introduce 3rd party evidence against Wints two brothers. The evidence presented was totally weak just like the jury has heard from the defense about DK.

Wints defense also promised much in OS, but failed to deliver in the end.

Iirc in that horrific case several were also worried the jury would buy into the defense argument with some even believing there may be a Not Guilty or hung jury. It didnt take all that long for the jury to come back with their verdict finding him Guilty of all 4 murders.

We have to remember, imo, how often the SODDI defense is used, and how many times it fails.

So many judges in every state allow this type of evidence to come in. They also know each DT must prove what they ascert is true backed up with supporting witness testimony.

This jury will also be told they can only use the evidence that came from the witness stand testimony.

Yes, it's a great travesty how these unethical defense lawyers have been so underhanded, deceptive, unethical, and devious in this case, IMO. Unfortunately they are not alone for other defense attorneys have done the same.

And yes, there is a possibility that one or two jurors may not have the ability to link all of the compelling CE facts together. Or the type who refuses to budge even when all of the other jurors tries to clearly explain the evidence presented, and what it shows.

I also worry about a stealth juror being on any case who had preconceived biases they have hidden from the court when selected.

But in the end, no matter the misconduct displayed in this trial, by the defense, imo, I, 100% believe Charles Merritt's verdict will never end with a unanimous verdict of NG.

If it has to be retired it will be done with a much quicker turnaround.

Ita! Next time the judge should exclude the flimsy 3 party so called evidence about DK.

The DT really proved nothing about DK being the killer, and allowed the state to drive a Mack truck right through the defense witness testimonies during the state's masterful cross examinations.


JMOO

 

[mrjitty]

I don't think it should be left to chance that the jury will piece it together, and they may in particular take some weight merely from the fact that the judge allowed them to hear all this stuff. They might imagine that there are reasons she disappeared, beyond having lied. I don't think the state should have been put in that disadvantaged position, ultimately risking a complete travesty of justice with the killer walking free, when the law exists to protect them from such games.

MOO

I think you and I posted independently some weeks ago that the defence was doing a course correction having committed too far on the DK theory

The OS is carefully crafted along failure to investigate lines with multiple killers in teams of 2 plus DK lurking nefariously in the shadows

By the end of forensic dude, they seemed very committed to DK as the real killer - but the trouble always has been that DK had a strong alibi

So then we saw all the detectives called instead of following up their big forensic accounting witness with Tracey R and the hammer blow confession

IMO it was a completely tactical decision, based on how weak the DK sauce was

Failure to investigate DK is going to look really stupid in closing against his alibi. None of it is substantiated. Where is the landlord evidence for example?

Meanwhile the state has bank records, a witness, paid tickets and sworn testimony of the passenger records. Whoops!

So rather than double down on that, I think they will go heavy on the 4 killers.

 

[la2cabo]

I hope when the PT does closing arguments they don't agree to any further delays. If the PT is allowed sufficient time to go over the evidence in a fluid manner they need to take advantage of it to make sure the jury fully understands every little piece of evidence as well as every untruth put forward by the defense. The evidence needs to be viewed as an entire picture without interruption.

 

[citygirl]

I hope when the PT does closing arguments they don't agree to any further delays. If the PT is allowed sufficient time to go over the evidence in a fluid manner they need to take advantage of it to make sure the jury fully understands every little piece of evidence as well as every untruth put forward by the defense. The evidence needs to be viewed as an entire picture without interruption.

I'm hoping MR and Imes do it.
IMO, Maline will struggle on his own.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

How many agree who have followed trials for years this trial has been without a doubt the most painful, and hardest trial to follow?

How many of you have ever seen a trial that can even compare to this one?

I do think hands down this murder trial as set the record for the longest delays in any defense CIC ever. It should be recorded in the Justice Hall of Shame. Imo

Never did I think I would see our justice system mistreated in this way or to this severe degree.

If it has been this agonizing for many of us can we even begin to imagine how this farce has affected Joey, and Summer's loved ones who have waited so long to see justice served?

There have been several times in the past couple of months I wanted to give up, and no longer follow. Then I think of the pain this has caused the victims families, and know if they can withstand this circus, so can I.

God be with them all as they wait, wait, and wait for their very long journey to end.

May the Joey McStay family finally receive justice they all so deserve.

Imoo

 

[Force Ten]

I'm hoping MR and Imes do it.
IMO, Maline will struggle on his own.

I hope Rodriguez at least goes first, speaking to a man corralling, mercilessly beatening a man, his wife and children to death. I want to watch her stare the defendant down in doing so.

 

[la2cabo]

I hope Rodriguez at least goes first, speaking to a man corralling, mercilessly beatening a man, his wife and children to death. I want to watch her stare the defendant down in doing so.

I hope she also goes last so she can leave a final impression on the jury.