CO - Gannon Stauch, 11, found deceased, Colorado Springs, El Paso County, 27 Jan 2020 *Arrest* #54

Status
Not open for further replies.
:eek: Yikes, they released the Defense's witnesses phone numbers?!!!!!
Hope this doesn't play into a mistrial if things don't go the defense's way. MOO.
Hopefully someone more trial savvy than me can answer that. I hope it's not an issue either for the trial or for the witnesses. MOO.
I'm sure not more savvy than you, @vls12345, but what you expressed is what worried me the minute I saw those phone numbers. I'm thinking they definitely should've been redacted, but I'm unsure what the ramifications. It's not protecting those witnesses, and that is disturbing. The answer must be someplace within these sections.


Section 3. {Confidentiality of victim and witness addresses and telephone numbers.} The residence and business addresses and telephone numbers of any victim of or witness to a crime shall be confidential.

See Section 5 also
 
I'm sure not more savvy than you, @vls12345, but what you expressed is what worried me the minute I saw those phone numbers. I'm thinking they definitely should've been redacted, but I'm unsure what the ramifications. It's not protecting those witnesses, and that is disturbing. The answer must be someplace within these sections.


Section 3. {Confidentiality of victim and witness addresses and telephone numbers.} The residence and business addresses and telephone numbers of any victim of or witness to a crime shall be confidential.

See Section 5 also
Well I am not a lawyer and I don’t think I’m any more savvy than anyone else here, but I don’t see any grounds for the Defense to complain.

I agree that these witnesses info should have been kept confidential, but it was the Defense responsibility to redact that info before filing the document . So they can’t say the Court screwed up here.

They are fully aware that when they file any document with the Courts, the Clerk of the Court has the discretion to make it immediately available to the public. If they don’t want it made public there are steps they can take to file it as suppressed or sealed.

The individuals on that list are not victims of a crime or witnesses to a crime ( who’s identity should absolutely be protected) but appear to be character witnesses for the Defendant.

Not saying that makes it okay, just saying I don’t see any cause for concern that this would affect the trial. The Court did not “ release” something that was supposed to be sealed .

The Defense filed this witness list on February 13 without taking 5 minutes to white out those phone numbers, it’s all on them. JMO

If they thought it should not be available to the Public, they would have done something by now.
 
...The individuals on that list are not victims of a crime or witnesses to a crime ( who’s identity should absolutely be protected) but appear to be character witnesses for the Defendant...
All MOO here. You may be right, and it may have no bearing on the trial. It's just that I'm extremely careful about who gets my private info even my cell phone number, so I'd be upset that it wasn't redacted. Wouldn't you?

I'm thinking of one person on that list that could very well be harassed. It's someone that is very much related to the crime, someone that people, even here, have talked about, someone others would want to sway.

MOO, it's shocking to me that Defense is so flaky, or do they have a reason for that error. I don't trust them. Well, it could be just Defense's level of accuracy and precision is lacking right from the start.
 
All MOO here. You may be right, and it may have no bearing on the trial. It's just that I'm extremely careful about who gets my private info even my cell phone number, so I'd be upset that it wasn't redacted. Wouldn't you?

I'm thinking of one person on that list that could very well be harassed. It's someone that is very much related to the crime, someone that people, even here, have talked about, someone others would want to sway.

MOO, it's shocking to me that Defense is so flaky, or do they have a reason for that error. I don't trust them. Well, it could be just Defense's level of accuracy and precision is lacking right from the start.
Oh heck yeah I would be upset and I’m sorry I didn’t address the fact that those people should ABSOLUTELY be upset.

I said they are not victims, but I guess actually they are-+ just by being related to the monster. You would think the Defense would be more careful since the public vitriol towards their client makes these people more of a target for harassment.

I was just trying to speak to the question of if there could be a possibility of a mistrial or appeal because of this.

I agree that we just can’t trust what they might try.

JMO
 
I like this People's list:

Agent Grusing - We saw how awesome he is during the Morphew Case
HH - Daughter of LS - Interesting to see what she has to say
LS- Daughter of AS - Poor baby, I wonder if she will have a pre recorded statement or actually take the stand?

Looks like they're bringing in the attempted escape and assault from El Paso info. Good, that to me help proves LS isn't crazy, just dangerous.

MOO
 
I like this People's list:

Agent Grusing - We saw how awesome he is during the Morphew Case
HH - Daughter of LS - Interesting to see what she has to say
LS- Daughter of AS - Poor baby, I wonder if she will have a pre recorded statement or actually take the stand?

Looks like they're bringing in the attempted escape and assault from El Paso info. Good, that to me help proves LS isn't crazy, just dangerous.

MOO
I really, really hope there is as sheltered a way as possible for Little Sis to give testimony if she has to. It makes me feel sick to the stomach thinking of her on the stand, being cross-examined, with that person staring her down.

MOO
 
I really, really hope there is as sheltered a way as possible for Little Sis to give testimony if she has to. It makes me feel sick to the stomach thinking of her on the stand, being cross-examined, with that person staring her down.

MOO
I've noticed in prior trials that child witnesses are treated very gently by both sides. Nobody wants to put an innocent child on the stand and then mistreat them during testimony. This little girl is an innocent party, and likely was abused by LS as well. I think both sides will be delicate, as they should be.

MOO
 
I've noticed in prior trials that child witnesses are treated very gently by both sides. Nobody wants to put an innocent child on the stand and then mistreat them during testimony. This little girl is an innocent party, and likely was abused by LS as well. I think both sides will be delicate, as they should be.

MOO
I'm not saying the legal bods won't be gentle with her, I'm just thinking how terrified I would be to even be in the same room as her, let alone talk aloud about the abuse, knowing she killed my brother, with her staring me down the whole time. If it was me, I'd want BACA by my side.

Bikers Against Child Abuse - Wikipedia

MOO
 
I've noticed in prior trials that child witnesses are treated very gently by both sides. Nobody wants to put an innocent child on the stand and then mistreat them during testimony. This little girl is an innocent party, and likely was abused by LS as well. I think both sides will be delicate, as they should be.

MOO
They could use a screen so the child cannot see the defendant.
 
I like this People's list:

Agent Grusing - We saw how awesome he is during the Morphew Case
HH - Daughter of LS - Interesting to see what she has to say
LS- Daughter of AS - Poor baby, I wonder if she will have a pre recorded statement or actually take the stand?

Looks like they're bringing in the attempted escape and assault from El Paso info. Good, that to me help proves LS isn't crazy, just dangerous.

MOO
I wate patiently to see what LS has to say...
 
I've noticed in prior trials that child witnesses are treated very gently by both sides. Nobody wants to put an innocent child on the stand and then mistreat them during testimony. This little girl is an innocent party, and likely was abused by LS as well. I think both sides will be delicate, as they should be.

MOO
I'm sure you are right and both sides will be very careful. Plus she's 11, not 5. And it wouldn't make sense in this sort of case to allow her to testify but then skip the cross examination (unless she was making a victim impact statement after the guilt phase.) But during the guilt phase she's either a witness or she's not. And it may turn out she's not. Just because she's on the state's list doesn't mean she'll be called. Both sides tend to play games with those lists. (Imply they'll call X, force their opponent to spend time and resources investigating X, etc)
JMO
 
Maybe Gannon was able to make a statement.

Jmo
I wish.
But I don’t think so. When would LE or anyone else have seen evidence of that on LS ? She certainly didn’t consent to any physical examination in the few days before she high tailed it to Florida.

Sadly, I think the Expert will testify regarding G being identified by the little gap in between his front teeth.

JMO
 
I wish.
But I don’t think so. When would LE or anyone else have seen evidence of that on LS ? She certainly didn’t consent to any physical examination in the few days before she high tailed it to Florida.

Sadly, I think the Expert will testify regarding G being identified by the little gap in between his front teeth.

JMO
I agree. He was positively identified by his dental records. I think he also had a shattered jaw or was struck by a bullet. It's probably a technical finding. JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
232
Guests online
4,431
Total visitors
4,663

Forum statistics

Threads
592,327
Messages
17,967,461
Members
228,748
Latest member
renenoelle
Back
Top