2011.06.15 TRIAL Day Nineteen (Morning Session)
- Thread starter beach
- Start date
New Posts
-
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #182- Latest: girlhasnoname
-
- Status
MelissaLee
Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the m
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2011
- Messages
- 714
- Reaction score
- 0
Counts 1 through 7 DENIED!!!!
State has presented substantial competent evidence.
OMGosh!!! So happy.
Recess til 9am tomorrow
State has presented substantial competent evidence.
OMGosh!!! So happy.
Recess til 9am tomorrow
Bon
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,577
- Reaction score
- 1
I honestly believe Cindy would throw her a really nice homecoming party!!! She won her dtr back...and to Cindy that's all that mattered! And I guess the empty chair that Caylee use to sit in wouldn't really matter...
watchinginky
Please let today be the day they find HaLeigh
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2008
- Messages
- 1,349
- Reaction score
- 1
:denied:
mombomb
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1,437
- Reaction score
- -3
HHJBP -
Serano v State - correctly lays out the standard for motions for judgement of acquittal.
Derisso (sp) v State - Court says that when faced with a motion for judgement of acquittal in a circumstantial case.
Reynolds v State - when there is inconsistency the question is one for the finder of fact to resolve and the motion must be denied. State is not required to rebut conclusively every possibility but only to introduce competent evidence that is inconsistent with the defendant's theory of defense. Then it becomes the Jury's duty. Pre-meditation is for the Jury to decide. Pierce (sp) v State - premeditation may be inferred by methods and manners. Elements by circumstantial evidence, the evidence must be inconsistent with every other reasonable..
Rose v. State - deals with circumstantial evidence. The Defendant was the last person seen with the victim. Defendant had some motive. 8 year old victim. Evidence revealed Defendant was last person to be seen with her, that he left the bowling alley with her and that he had dated the mother for about 9 months, they were no longer dating because he was an extremely jealous person. He was later found with a large spot of blood on his pants, fiber evidence and the Defendant made numerous inconsistent statements. Court concluded that was sufficient evidence to sustain the crime charged.
Cranon (sp) v. State - Interesting facts - evidence showed that the 52 year old defendant met the victim's mother, that he was the last person seen with this victim. Interesting to note, the last time the child was seen, she was sleeping next to the defendant, then the person abruptly disappeared. The Supreme Court found this evidence was sufficient - citing Eperly (sp).
Eperly v State - victim disappeared. Last seen leaving hotel with the Defendant, went to a lake house and ultimately disappeared - body never found. Premeditation meaning discussed.
Persuasive value case cited. In 1973 in Massachusetts a tenant heard moaning sounds from a cellar. They then found a boy lying naked face down on the floor. LE was called and they took the boy to the hospital. He remained there for a few days, was later discharged, came back home, began to deteriorate, went back to hospital, where he remained until his death. Evidence was that the victim was last seen in the company of the defendant prior to the disappearance of the victim. Defendant and victim were seen together shortly before the victim's disappearance at the entrance of the building by two witnesses. Victim was discovered shortly thereafter. Court concluded this was sufficient evidence since the defendant was with the victim immediately prior to finding the victim.
Zone v State - Last case he reviewed, a case out of Arkansas - Defendant and co-defendant were the last two people seen with the victim. Court concluded this was sufficient evidence.
Regarding Felony Murder:
Brooks v State and Lewis - reviewed on doctrine of merger. Agg child abuse is a predicate offense to felony murder - regardless of the number of acts. Key argument is whether there is more than one single act.
In this particular case there is more than a single act: duct taping of nose and mouth, the presence of chloroform in the trunk, coupled with the fact that there is evidence that the child was placed in a trash bag and other container and the statements introduced into evidence and even during this time period ICA made statements that the child was alive. It is quite clear in this particular case that there is more than one single act which satisfies the test of Brooks v. State.
Considering evidence in light most favorable to state and considering the evidence, the Defense's motion of judgement of acquittal as to counts 1-7 is denied. These are questions for the Jury to decide. The court finds the state has presented substantial competent evidence.
Serano v State - correctly lays out the standard for motions for judgement of acquittal.
Derisso (sp) v State - Court says that when faced with a motion for judgement of acquittal in a circumstantial case.
Reynolds v State - when there is inconsistency the question is one for the finder of fact to resolve and the motion must be denied. State is not required to rebut conclusively every possibility but only to introduce competent evidence that is inconsistent with the defendant's theory of defense. Then it becomes the Jury's duty. Pre-meditation is for the Jury to decide. Pierce (sp) v State - premeditation may be inferred by methods and manners. Elements by circumstantial evidence, the evidence must be inconsistent with every other reasonable..
Rose v. State - deals with circumstantial evidence. The Defendant was the last person seen with the victim. Defendant had some motive. 8 year old victim. Evidence revealed Defendant was last person to be seen with her, that he left the bowling alley with her and that he had dated the mother for about 9 months, they were no longer dating because he was an extremely jealous person. He was later found with a large spot of blood on his pants, fiber evidence and the Defendant made numerous inconsistent statements. Court concluded that was sufficient evidence to sustain the crime charged.
Cranon (sp) v. State - Interesting facts - evidence showed that the 52 year old defendant met the victim's mother, that he was the last person seen with this victim. Interesting to note, the last time the child was seen, she was sleeping next to the defendant, then the person abruptly disappeared. The Supreme Court found this evidence was sufficient - citing Eperly (sp).
Eperly v State - victim disappeared. Last seen leaving hotel with the Defendant, went to a lake house and ultimately disappeared - body never found. Premeditation meaning discussed.
Persuasive value case cited. In 1973 in Massachusetts a tenant heard moaning sounds from a cellar. They then found a boy lying naked face down on the floor. LE was called and they took the boy to the hospital. He remained there for a few days, was later discharged, came back home, began to deteriorate, went back to hospital, where he remained until his death. Evidence was that the victim was last seen in the company of the defendant prior to the disappearance of the victim. Defendant and victim were seen together shortly before the victim's disappearance at the entrance of the building by two witnesses. Victim was discovered shortly thereafter. Court concluded this was sufficient evidence since the defendant was with the victim immediately prior to finding the victim.
Zone v State - Last case he reviewed, a case out of Arkansas - Defendant and co-defendant were the last two people seen with the victim. Court concluded this was sufficient evidence.
Regarding Felony Murder:
Brooks v State and Lewis - reviewed on doctrine of merger. Agg child abuse is a predicate offense to felony murder - regardless of the number of acts. Key argument is whether there is more than one single act.
In this particular case there is more than a single act: duct taping of nose and mouth, the presence of chloroform in the trunk, coupled with the fact that there is evidence that the child was placed in a trash bag and other container and the statements introduced into evidence and even during this time period ICA made statements that the child was alive. It is quite clear in this particular case that there is more than one single act which satisfies the test of Brooks v. State.
Considering evidence in light most favorable to state and considering the evidence, the Defense's motion of judgement of acquittal as to counts 1-7 is denied. These are questions for the Jury to decide. The court finds the state has presented substantial competent evidence.
BigFatMommyDog
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2008
- Messages
- 4,932
- Reaction score
- -25
oohhhh Hissy Pissy!
Roze
Founding Member of AFKBPOFPOPL, Part-time Dentist
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 2,687
- Reaction score
- 2
He should be praying but I think he's playing Angry Birds on his cell phone.
Drama Queen
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 0
Denied..and guard walks behind ICA to help her out.
KenoshaKid
All the darkness in the world cannot put out a sin
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,147
- Reaction score
- 0
ICA seems to be taking it pretty well.
TotallyObsessed
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,096
- Reaction score
- 1
NOTING: She did not stand up for the judge after his announcement and exit.
ALSO: Were is Ms. Sims today? Bailed? Had enough?
ALSO: Were is Ms. Sims today? Bailed? Had enough?
TiaM
Calm and Watchful Now
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,746
- Reaction score
- 0
In other words ICA:
You did not fool LE
You did not fool the "idiot bloggers"
You did not fool the SA
You did not fool HHJP
and, perhaps most importantly
You ARE NOT fooling the jury
Tap that arm for veins, the needle is coming.
You did not fool LE
You did not fool the "idiot bloggers"
You did not fool the SA
You did not fool HHJP
and, perhaps most importantly
You ARE NOT fooling the jury
Tap that arm for veins, the needle is coming.
- Status