2016.02.26 Mark D. Sievers: ***ARREST*** GJ charged with Murder in the 1st Degree #2

New Posts

IQuestion said:
Hiya MsJosie! Yes, many things were "cancelled". Witnesses were categorized as "A" (important witnesses who will probably be called to testify in a trial) and they should have been categorized as "C" (people with info, but not necessary to testify on witness stand). The link to this story will explain in detail.
http://www.nbc-2.com/story/35631627/state-admits-mistake-in-sievers-court-case
..."The witnesses should have actually been listed as Category C. That would mean the witnesses couldn't be called in to testify nor could the defense subpoena them for questioning in the pre-trial.

The 47 planned depositions were scheduled by attorneys from Faga Law representing Mark Sievers, and within a day, the State Attorney's Office noticed their mistake on the witness list."
Click to expand...

Thanks IQuestion sometimes the legal paper work is baffling! I appreciate your explanation. This will be an interesting trial when it starts.
 
MsJosie said:
Thanks IQuestion sometimes the legal paper work is baffling! I appreciate your explanation. This will be an interesting trial when it starts.
Click to expand...
No problemo MsJosie I struggle with the "legal wranglings & nomenclature" as well! My blood pressure goes up every time I try to decipher sophisticated courtroom words, like "QUASH",lol. Was hoping someone fluent in "legalese" would chime in. Guess we'll have to settle for my LEGAL-EASE interpretations assisted by google.
Also wanted to mention on TS's trust, there was a clause for Income Distribution during Life of Spouse and "Five and Five" Withdrawal Right of Spouse. Simply put, it means that MS does not have to be the Trustee (Cuz he could have a mental defect, Alzheimers, brain tumor, incapacitating injury etc or in this case incarcerated that could make it impossible for him to be the Trustee.) But, he is still A BENEFICIARY OF THE TRUST....ouch!
So, with the 5 and 5 clause, he could ask for $5000 or 5% of the value of the trust each year. On a $4mil trust, that could mean an annual withdraw of up to $200,000 a year! I think this is what Atty F was alluding to when he (paraphrasing) "those funds may very well be used for his defense, even though he can not use them for his benefit." So it was a "no brainer" to not fight the Trustee issue, at this time. Now with a new Trustee, the insurance companies will pay the proceeds into TS's trust....and MS's attys will petition for the "Five and Five" and use it for MS's defense. Omg....what a mess. MS will never "plea bargain" anything....right now, he could be in jail for pick pocketing or accused of murder and still be entitled because he hasn't been convicted of anything! And, even if convicted, I think he can file appeal after appeal....and during the appeal process again be eligible to petition for funds....let me repeat, "what a mess."
 
IQuestion said:
Hiya MsJosie! Yes, many things were "cancelled". Witnesses were categorized as "A" (important witnesses who will probably be called to testify in a trial) and they should have been categorized as "C" (people with info, but not necessary to testify on witness stand). The link to this story will explain in detail.
http://www.nbc-2.com/story/35631627/state-admits-mistake-in-sievers-court-case
..."The witnesses should have actually been listed as Category C. That would mean the witnesses couldn't be called in to testify nor could the defense subpoena them for questioning in the pre-trial.

The 47 planned depositions were scheduled by attorneys from Faga Law representing Mark Sievers, and within a day, the State Attorney's Office noticed their mistake on the witness list."
Click to expand...

Thank you, IQ, for the link! I am quite baffled..That wasn't the first mistake by the SAO (.. the original motion to seek the death penalty didn't specify the right factors justifying the state seeking capital punishment) and I can only hope we won't see more procedural missteps.

-Nin
 
IQuestion said:
No problemo MsJosie I struggle with the "legal wranglings & nomenclature" as well! My blood pressure goes up every time I try to decipher sophisticated courtroom words, like "QUASH",lol. Was hoping someone fluent in "legalese" would chime in. Guess we'll have to settle for my LEGAL-EASE interpretations assisted by google.
Also wanted to mention on TS's trust, there was a clause for Income Distribution during Life of Spouse and "Five and Five" Withdrawal Right of Spouse. Simply put, it means that MS does not have to be the Trustee (Cuz he could have a mental defect, Alzheimers, brain tumor, incapacitating injury etc or in this case incarcerated that could make it impossible for him to be the Trustee.) But, he is still A BENEFICIARY OF THE TRUST....ouch!
So, with the 5 and 5 clause, he could ask for $5000 or 5% of the value of the trust each year. On a $4mil trust, that could mean an annual withdraw of up to $200,000 a year! I think this is what Atty F was alluding to when he (paraphrasing) "those funds may very well be used for his defense, even though he can not use them for his benefit." So it was a "no brainer" to not fight the Trustee issue, at this time. Now with a new Trustee, the insurance companies will pay the proceeds into TS's trust....and MS's attys will petition for the "Five and Five" and use it for MS's defense. Omg....what a mess. MS will never "plea bargain" anything....right now, he could be in jail for pick pocketing or accused of murder and still be entitled because he hasn't been convicted of anything! And, even if convicted, I think he can file appeal after appeal....and during the appeal process again be eligible to petition for funds....let me repeat, "what a mess."
Click to expand...

I do not mean to quote myself, but this link will explain it better!
http://www.nbc-2.com/category/301598/the-murder-of-dr-teresa-sievers
And immediately after the video, the next one that comes up is a pretty blonde reporter (aren't they all?) in a yellow top has the story about the texts between MS and CWW, 2 days after the wedding. I took screen shots of the texts...and they are OUTrageous because of what they discuss and how cavalier they are about their activities on the "wedding eve" disgust-a-bration. (I had to make a new word to describe the texts!)
 
THE TEXTS! All on May 4, 2015, two days after the wedding in De Soto, Missouri! (please note I am typing the texts as exact as I possibly am able, so I hope I did not leave any out of order or make any errors. If I did, I apologize in advance and welcome any corrections. IQ) The words in red are MY comments on the texts.
CWW 7:22:31 It misses you :)
CWW 7:22:55 How soon do you want to get that upgrade
MS 7:23:32 not sure... call if you can
MS 7:24:32 im alone for 5 mins
CWW 7:38:26 I'm not...
MS 8:00:33 later then :)
CWW 8:10:29 Just left the babies and we are headed home now
MS 8:19:10 we?
CWW 8:19:36 Angie and I
MS 8:19:41 what i have is very personal...no offense to Mrs. Weight
(I DID NOT MISTYPE THAT! MS referred to Mrs. Weight not Mrs. Wright)
MS 8:20:02 unless u just want to chat
CWW 8:20:21 That's why I didn't call you...
MS 8:20:46 :) how is "our" Angie?
CWW 8:21:06 She is great!
MS 8:21:14 should have offered her a blindfold the other night :)
CWW 8:22:37 Why would she need a blindfold? Everyone can't tell the difference between us in the pictures from the wedding
CWW (I can not read the time mark on the next text) It's been funny
 
Just found one more text between these 2 monsters on May 22, 2015 from News Press


the last instance of the use of the word other in quotation marks occurred on May 22, 2015.
"Do you think we can talk a little tonight? just need 3 mins... setting static ipT home "other" than charging..." Mark Sievers wrote.
Wright responded he would call in five minutes.


http://www.news-press.com/story/new...-sievers-death-spoke-husband-often/101257256/
 
IQuestion said:
THE TEXTS! All on May 4, 2015, two days after the wedding in De Soto, Missouri! (please note I am typing the texts as exact as I possibly am able, so I hope I did not leave any out of order or make any errors. If I did, I apologize in advance and welcome any corrections. IQ) The words in red are MY comments on the texts.
CWW 7:22:31 It misses you :)
CWW 7:22:55 How soon do you want to get that upgrade
MS 7:23:32 not sure... call if you can
MS 7:24:32 im alone for 5 mins
CWW 7:38:26 I'm not...
MS 8:00:33 later then :)
CWW 8:10:29 Just left the babies and we are headed home now
MS 8:19:10 we?
CWW 8:19:36 Angie and I
MS 8:19:41 what i have is very personal...no offense to Mrs. Weight
(I DID NOT MISTYPE THAT! MS referred to Mrs. Weight not Mrs. Wright)
MS 8:20:02 unless u just want to chat
CWW 8:20:21 That's why I didn't call you...
MS 8:20:46 :) how is "our" Angie?
CWW 8:21:06 She is great!
MS 8:21:14 should have offered her a blindfold the other night :)
CWW 8:22:37 Why would she need a blindfold? Everyone can't tell the difference between us in the pictures from the wedding
CWW (I can not read the time mark on the next text) It's been funny
Click to expand...

I found the time of the last text on the post above!!!
CWW 8:22:43 It's been funny

On a side note....I think these 2 men took advantage of AW. and (for the lack of a better word) have a really sick sense of humor. However, AW was blinded by love and devotion for her new husband, CWW.
(I feel as if the detective interviewing AW was kindly trying to say the same thing. In my book, he gets the Rogerian Psychotherapy Award for patience and understanding!) For the first time, I actually felt some sympathy
for AW.....but she needs to stop trying to cover for CWW.
 
IQuestion said:
THE TEXTS! All on May 4, 2015, two days after the wedding in De Soto, Missouri! (please note I am typing the texts as exact as I possibly am able, so I hope I did not leave any out of order or make any errors. If I did, I apologize in advance and welcome any corrections. IQ) The words in red are MY comments on the texts.
CWW 7:22:31 It misses you :)
CWW 7:22:55 How soon do you want to get that upgrade
MS 7:23:32 not sure... call if you can
MS 7:24:32 im alone for 5 mins
CWW 7:38:26 I'm not...
MS 8:00:33 later then :)
CWW 8:10:29 Just left the babies and we are headed home now
MS 8:19:10 we?
CWW 8:19:36 Angie and I
MS 8:19:41 what i have is very personal...no offense to Mrs. Weight
(I DID NOT MISTYPE THAT! MS referred to Mrs. Weight not Mrs. Wright)
MS 8:20:02 unless u just want to chat
CWW 8:20:21 That's why I didn't call you...
MS 8:20:46 :) how is "our" Angie?
CWW 8:21:06 She is great!
MS 8:21:14 should have offered her a blindfold the other night :)
CWW 8:22:37 Why would she need a blindfold? Everyone can't tell the difference between us in the pictures from the wedding
CWW (I can not read the time mark on the next text) It's been funny
Click to expand...
Wow. Disgusting individuals is Wright!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
 
No it's not said:
Thank you, IQ, for the link! I am quite baffled..That wasn't the first mistake by the SAO (.. the original motion to seek the death penalty didn't specify the right factors justifying the state seeking capital punishment) and I can only hope we won't see more procedural missteps.

-Nin
Click to expand...

Makes me mad again remembering when the motion seeking the DP was 'fouled' (not 'filed' correctly). The Asst State Attny did that. Like what the hell are they doing?! Makes you wonder what else are they messing up after all the hard work & long hours investigating, interviewing, etc. Yes, mistakes are made BUT this is a murder case with multiple perps & tons of evidence that LE has now dropped in SAO lap to duly process and the Asst SA doesn't tend to required specifics filing for the DP?! An attorney's professional life is details---it's their job. Yes, I'm ranting but look at the BS 'legal' strategies used by defenders to postpone/drag out forever or looking for 'holes' in the offense if all is not done correct legally. GEEZ, I would think LE would be quite pi$$ed when this happens.

Hoping for trial sooner than later AND TS's mom can move back to CT with the girls. I don't get why any judge wouldn't grant that move for the literal sanity of those young girls considering what they'll definitely be exposed to. Go figure.
 
msboo said:
Makes me mad again remembering when the motion seeking the DP was 'fouled' (not 'filed' correctly). The Asst State Attny did that. Like what the hell are they doing?! Makes you wonder what else are they messing up after all the hard work & long hours investigating, interviewing, etc. Yes, mistakes are made BUT this is a murder case with multiple perps & tons of evidence that LE has now dropped in SAO lap to duly process and the Asst SA doesn't tend to required specifics filing for the DP?! An attorney's professional life is details---it's their job. Yes, I'm ranting but look at the BS 'legal' strategies used by defenders to postpone/drag out forever or looking for 'holes' in the offense if all is not done correct legally. GEEZ, I would think LE would be quite pi$$ed when this happens.

Hoping for trial sooner than later AND TS's mom can move back to CT with the girls. I don't get why any judge wouldn't grant that move for the literal sanity of those young girls considering what they'll definitely be exposed to. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Hi MSBOO-tiful...I think there are going to be a lot of "missteps" on both sides of this case. It comes with the territory. (BTW have been cutting down bushes, with a vengeance as I think about all the havoc and tragedy.) I have been more concerned MS would benefit because of the 5 and 5 spouse clause. When Atty F implied the money could be used for MS's defense....it just really, really irritated me. (The "paradox", not Atty F) So did some research and realized the situation is not so bleak. TS's family can file a "wrongful death suit" and if successful, get a judgment against MS!!
MS would then attempt to file bankruptcy. But, but, but....if the action that caused the death was intentional...the debt would be non-dischargable. Yahoo! Do you remember the wrongful death suit filed against OJ Simpson by the Goldman and Brown families? OJ's attempts to hide his assets and trying to retrieve sports memorabilia at gunpoint is what finally got him in prison.
I don't think it will be very difficult to collect on a civil judgment against MS. I'm sure the legal eagles are 15 steps ahead on this. Okey dokey then...back to my chain saw!:werk:
 
No it's not said:
Thank you, IQ, for the link! I am quite baffled..That wasn't the first mistake by the SAO (.. the original motion to seek the death penalty didn't specify the right factors justifying the state seeking capital punishment) and I can only hope we won't see more procedural missteps.

-Nin
Click to expand...
HOLY MOLEY NIN! I went back and read posts (14 months ago) of yours and BEACH, specifically this incredible piece of information YOU provided. (Apr. 15, 2016 #57 on the Mark D. Sievers ***arrest*** Thread) Wrongful death suits have to be filed within 2 years in Florida....
What the heck? Shut The Front Door! Can the time be extended if the criminal case has not proceeded?

"Very true, thank you, beach! On the other hand, they will have to file within 2 years since TS' death due to Statutes of Limitations in Florida. The limitations vary in different states. Just a heads up."

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/...s/0095.11.html

-Nin

Ps.....specifically line 4d...An action for wrongful death.
 
IQuestion said:
No problemo MsJosie I struggle with the "legal wranglings & nomenclature" as well! My blood pressure goes up every time I try to decipher sophisticated courtroom words, like "QUASH",lol. Was hoping someone fluent in "legalese" would chime in. Guess we'll have to settle for my LEGAL-EASE interpretations assisted by google.
Also wanted to mention on TS's trust, there was a clause for Income Distribution during Life of Spouse and "Five and Five" Withdrawal Right of Spouse. Simply put, it means that MS does not have to be the Trustee (Cuz he could have a mental defect, Alzheimers, brain tumor, incapacitating injury etc or in this case incarcerated that could make it impossible for him to be the Trustee.) But, he is still A BENEFICIARY OF THE TRUST....ouch!
So, with the 5 and 5 clause, he could ask for $5000 or 5% of the value of the trust each year. On a $4mil trust, that could mean an annual withdraw of up to $200,000 a year! I think this is what Atty F was alluding to when he (paraphrasing) "those funds may very well be used for his defense, even though he can not use them for his benefit." So it was a "no brainer" to not fight the Trustee issue, at this time. Now with a new Trustee, the insurance companies will pay the proceeds into TS's trust....and MS's attys will petition for the "Five and Five" and use it for MS's defense. Omg....what a mess. MS will never "plea bargain" anything....right now, he could be in jail for pick pocketing or accused of murder and still be entitled because he hasn't been convicted of anything! And, even if convicted, I think he can file appeal after appeal....and during the appeal process again be eligible to petition for funds....let me repeat, "what a mess."
Click to expand...

From Merriam-Webster:

quash - to suppress or extinguish summarily and completely; quash a rebellion

(But can she use it in a sentence? Yes: The state of Florida will surely quash Mark Sievers.)
a095.gif


(((IQ! Missed you!!)))
 
IQuestion said:
HOLY MOLEY NIN! I went back and read posts (14 months ago) of yours and BEACH, specifically this incredible piece of information YOU provided. (Apr. 15, 2016 #57 on the Mark D. Sievers ***arrest*** Thread) Wrongful death suits have to be filed within 2 years in Florida....
What the heck? Shut The Front Door! Can the time be extended if the criminal case has not proceeded?

"Very true, thank you, beach! On the other hand, they will have to file within 2 years since TS' death due to Statutes of Limitations in Florida. The limitations vary in different states. Just a heads up."

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/...s/0095.11.html

-Nin

Ps.....specifically line 4d...An action for wrongful death.
Click to expand...

IQ glad you mentioned other states as Grandma and Kids will be in in Connecticut and Mom is a resident there she may be able to filed there rather Fla if statue runs out
 
IQuestion said:
THE TEXTS! All on May 4, 2015, two days after the wedding in De Soto, Missouri! (please note I am typing the texts as exact as I possibly am able, so I hope I did not leave any out of order or make any errors. If I did, I apologize in advance and welcome any corrections. IQ) The words in red are MY comments on the texts.
CWW 7:22:31 It misses you :)
CWW 7:22:55 How soon do you want to get that upgrade
MS 7:23:32 not sure... call if you can
MS 7:24:32 im alone for 5 mins
CWW 7:38:26 I'm not...
MS 8:00:33 later then :)
CWW 8:10:29 Just left the babies and we are headed home now
MS 8:19:10 we?
CWW 8:19:36 Angie and I
MS 8:19:41 what i have is very personal...no offense to Mrs. Weight
(I DID NOT MISTYPE THAT! MS referred to Mrs. Weight not Mrs. Wright)
MS 8:20:02 unless u just want to chat
CWW 8:20:21 That's why I didn't call you...
MS 8:20:46 :) how is "our" Angie?
CWW 8:21:06 She is great!
MS 8:21:14 should have offered her a blindfold the other night :)
CWW 8:22:37 Why would she need a blindfold? Everyone can't tell the difference between us in the pictures from the wedding
CWW (I can not read the time mark on the next text) It's been funny
Click to expand...

I have been so busy lately, did I miss a new doc dump??
 
Jessicades said:
I have been so busy lately, did I miss a new doc dump??
Click to expand...
No Jessicades.
You have not missed a doc dump. I wrote that the texts were from SCREEN SHOTS off of a news story about the texts. It is on post #1161.
"I do not mean to quote myself, but this link will explain it better!
http://www.nbc-2.com/category/301598...teresa-sievers
And immediately after the video, the next one that comes up is a pretty blonde reporter (aren't they all?) in a yellow top has the story about the texts between MS and CWW, 2 days after the wedding. I took screen shots of the texts...and they are OUTrageous because of what they discuss and how cavalier they are about their activities on the "wedding eve" disgust-a-bration. (I had to make a new word to describe the texts!)

J, am so technology challenged, I could cook a 7 course meal quicker than I could ever learn how to post a screen shot. I'm still fascinated when I hit the print icon on a computer and it actually works....
 
IQuestion said:
Hiya MsJosie! Yes, many things were "cancelled". Witnesses were categorized as "A" (important witnesses who will probably be called to testify in a trial) and they should have been categorized as "C" (people with info, but not necessary to testify on witness stand). The link to this story will explain in detail.
http://www.nbc-2.com/story/35631627/state-admits-mistake-in-sievers-court-case
..."The witnesses should have actually been listed as Category C. That would mean the witnesses couldn't be called in to testify nor could the defense subpoena them for questioning in the pre-trial.

The 47 planned depositions were scheduled by attorneys from Faga Law representing Mark Sievers, and within a day, the State Attorney's Office noticed their mistake on the witness list."
Click to expand...

Yep, exactly. The Motion For Protective Order filed now with the SAO comments ( it's different from other one previously posted/ 22 pages. This one is 33 pages):

STATE'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

Comes Now Stephen B. Russell, State Attorney for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit of Florida, by and
through the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, and hereby files this Motion for Protective Order
and to Quash the Subpoena(s) served upon the following witnesses on the following grounds:

1) The Defendant has recently filed a Notice of Deposition indicating intent to depose the below
listed witnesses in this case.

2) On May 17, 2017, the State filed an amended witness list correcting an error in its original
witness list (Exhibit A) and amended the below witnesses to Category C witnesses under rule
3.220(b)(l)(A)(iii).

3) The involvement of the listed Category C witnesses is either set out in a report provided to the
defense or in statement of the witness provided by the state.

4) The State does not intend to call the listed Category C witnesses as witnesses at trial due to
their lack of knowledge of the facts of the crime.

5) As of the filing of this motion, the defense has failed to make a showing to the Court that the
witnesses should now be listed under another category under Rule 3.220(h)(l)(C).

6) Due to the fact that the Defendant has not made the required showing, the State requests that
the Court issue a protective order and quash any subpoenas issued pursuant to the Notices of
Deposition filed by the defense (exhibits B,C, D) filed in this case.
...

File:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3g3DEap84xwOEVFRHpKdE4wQjg/view?usp=sharing

-Nin
 
by wanting to depose the entire neighborhood seeing as how most reports from various neighbors interviewed (so far that we've read in or seen on msm) have all been that he was very, very odd. His behavior creeped out some of them.


No it's not said:
Yep, exactly. The Motion For Protective Order filed now with the SAO comments ( it's different from other one previously posted/ 22 pages. This one is 33 pages):

STATE'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

Comes Now Stephen B. Russell, State Attorney for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit of Florida, by and
through the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, and hereby files this Motion for Protective Order
and to Quash the Subpoena(s) served upon the following witnesses on the following grounds:

1) The Defendant has recently filed a Notice of Deposition indicating intent to depose the below
listed witnesses in this case.

2) On May 17, 2017, the State filed an amended witness list correcting an error in its original
witness list (Exhibit A) and amended the below witnesses to Category C witnesses under rule
3.220(b)(l)(A)(iii).

3) The involvement of the listed Category C witnesses is either set out in a report provided to the
defense or in statement of the witness provided by the state.

4) The State does not intend to call the listed Category C witnesses as witnesses at trial due to
their lack of knowledge of the facts of the crime.

5) As of the filing of this motion, the defense has failed to make a showing to the Court that the
witnesses should now be listed under another category under Rule 3.220(h)(l)(C).

6) Due to the fact that the Defendant has not made the required showing, the State requests that
the Court issue a protective order and quash any subpoenas issued pursuant to the Notices of
Deposition filed by the defense (exhibits B,C, D) filed in this case.
...

File:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3g3DEap84xwOEVFRHpKdE4wQjg/view?usp=sharing

-Nin
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 80 more.
Total: 4,451 (members: 81, guests: 4,370)

Online statistics

Members online
81
Guests online
4,370
Total visitors
4,451
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,397
Messages
17,968,333
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top