CO - James Holmes Trial Discussion - Begins April 27, 2015 # 4

[Maisiebelle]

Ooh Ms Spengler was called out again for not standing up when she addresses the judge!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[corundogs]

Ms. Spangler needs to accept the fact that she needs to get off her butt to address the Judge!!!

He just asked her a question twice, because she answered him the first time without moving!!!

Get it through your head! The Judge shows huge respect to his courtroom and those in it. You need to respect him!!

Sorry, but this DT is just irking me! Between the 3 women - the warbler (which I understand is just her voice), the barker (the short short haired woman) and the disrespecter - I guess I have reason. It isn't just that they are defending a mass murderer, because I know that he needs them for our Justice System to work. But man, those 3 women....

 

[Maisiebelle]

Wow, defence attorney's are paid nearly one hundred thousand dollars per year!

http://extras.denverpost.com/trial/profiles.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Whiteorchids]

Very boring testimony today. It was hard to stay awake.

 

[Maisiebelle]

Ms. Spangler needs to accept the fact that she needs to get off her butt to address the Judge!!!

He just asked her a question twice, because she answered him the first time without moving!!!

Get it through your head! The Judge shows huge respect to his courtroom and those in it. You need to respect him!!

Sorry, but this DT is just irking me! Between the 3 women - the warbler (which I understand is just her voice), the barker (the short short haired woman) and the disrespecter - I guess I have reason. It isn't just that they are defending a mass murderer, because I know that he needs them for our Justice System to work. But man, those 3 women....

Do you think they have surrounded him by women as if to say "look, he's harmless really ..... "


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[atthelake]

Wow, defence attorney's are paid nearly one hundred thousand dollars per year!

http://extras.denverpost.com/trial/profiles.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds low pay doesn't it

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[atthelake]

By that legal definition, I dont see the jury being able to say he was insane by that definition.

I think we should all have the correct definition in the state for the charges . This definition does not even in encompass knowing right from wrong legally ...which I thought was a basis ..

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[atthelake]

Yup! I was just coming in to ask that same thing. If anyone HERE was still able to pay attention...and more importantly, do y'all think the jury is getting anything out of this witness's testimony? Cause I just don't see how this minutia matters!

They have fully established he killed and injured many people. With the guns they held in their hands. And seen the receipts for the ammo he purchased. And seen 2 of the chairs from the theater.

I am finally to the point where I do think that Rule 403 is coming into play. I am no lawyer, but this has to be cumulative!

Each victim deserves Justice :moo:

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[Maisiebelle]

I read this yesterday.

http://www.lsd-journal.net/archives/Volume6/InsanityPlea.pdf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bexlex]

Hey guys....just now checking in .... wanted to share!!!

So was he confused in class because he was becoming insane or because he was preoccupied with his plans for the shooting......

Seriously....I'll be curious to hear what his notebook contains.

taking a 4 mom. old to midnight loud movie??? I don't know if I'd do that

OMG!! He put his baby down & then lost the baby!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He left the baby alone. I can't process that.

EEEKKKKK! He did run and leave them.

OK, I am sorry...but how in the world do you leave your baby, your 4 yo and your girlfriend...and then proceed to get in your truck and drive away? This is what was reported at the beginning...and I guess it's true.
It just didn't make much sense the way he is saying it played out.

O. M. G. I can't believe that is going to be a good marriage. My husband and I had an agreement that we would each take the baby and not stick around for the spouse....I always assumed in a house fire. My point was....don't save me, save the baby. NEVER did I consider either of us just tucking tail.....

I'll bet everyone here and in the courtroom are silently filling in the words he has so much problem getting out...I so respect this young man for his bravery ..I wanna give a big {{{Hug}}} or hold his hand and squeeze it for reassurance!!! :blushing:

Poor kid...I'll have to go to youtube

the definition of insanity from a law website: "Insanity. n. mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality, cannot conduct her/his affairs due to psychosis, or is subject to uncontrollable impulsive behavior."

This was just posted on TDC's discussion area. I know this has been discussed here a lot already. Just thought it was interesting to see it again.

I would say he doesn't fit any of those. Certainly not the last two. He had no problem putting this plan together, which rules out not being able to conduct his affairs. And since he had this planned so meticulously, including circling the date on his calendar, he was able to control his impulses. Or he would have just taken his gun and gone and shot up the local store or school or whatever when he got the urge.

So I guess that leaves the "unable to distinguish reality vs fantasy". I am a bit more stuck on that one. Anyone got anything? What do we have so far, as proof that he wasn't able to understand this was a very real reality.

I think we should all have the correct definition in the state for the charges . This definition does not even in encompass knowing right from wrong legally ...which I thought was a basis ..
Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

I would really like to be able to separate Legal Insanity from Mental Illness

 

[Benny08]

To address the jurors getting bored by now in there... They could very well be zoning out at times, although I think since this is such a high profile case it would tend to keep you more alert.

The jury I was recently on lasted about a month and involved a gun etc and they went over and over bullet angles and different witnesses repeatedly. And I'll admit there were a few times I was thinking about where I was going for lunch or looking at the clock wondering if we'll be out soon that day so I can get a jump on traffic. It can get really bad if you have a heavy lunch and then come back to boring testimony lol.

 

[zoey]

I seriously can't believe that dude bolted from the theater leaving his wife and kids to see if they can figure a way out on their own. At the very LEAST you need to carry one of your kids out of there if you are gonna make a break for it.

And thanks again for the continued posts you guys...

I'm still shaking my head over that one.....

 

[Hatfield]

I read this yesterday.

http://www.lsd-journal.net/archives/Volume6/InsanityPlea.pdf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WOW Thanks. That is a long article, but really worth reading.

Its no wonder we all get confused about the insanity defense because even the research evaluators disagreed with 26% of the 104 cases they looked at. They felt 26% of the court decisions were wrong.

The reasons they gave as to why courts get it wrong is very interesting. One of those things was feeling the defendent needs physchiatric help. The way I took that was the study found that the courts were mistakingly thinking....."we know he needs help, so we have decided he is insane so he gets the help he needs".....when that should not have come into play as far as their actual decision of whether he should be found guilty or not by reason of insanity.

The study indicated other reasons why courts get it wrong. Things like:
lack of familiarity with Colorado statues and the court’s lack of documented data to support the forensic recommendations.

Another scary part to me is Colorado's law which states the Prosecution needs to prove Holmes was sane. Some other states require the defendent to prove he was insane for a valid defense, but in Colorado, the prosecution has to prove JH was sane beyond a reasonable doubt.

The burden is on the prosecution. WOW. I didnt realize that until now. This makes it much tougher on the prosecution because under Colorado law, JH is presumed insane until proven otherwise.

After reading this, I really think the state should have taken that plea deal. Why make their job harder on themselves when they could have gotten a life sentence penalty for the crimes. I suppose public pressure may have forced their hand.

Its going to be interesting to see how the jury ends up deciding this case and its going to be interesting to see how the prosecution makes attempts to prove JH sanity at time of crime.
I think they are indirectly doing that to some extent by showing all his preparation and planning. But it will be interesting as the trial proceeds if they start to directly address the sanity issue. Like will the prosecution begin to bring in any professional doctors that testify specifically about his sanity or not.

I think the prosecution needs to do that because I am betting the defense surely will. The defense will no doubt try to bring in professionals to claim he was legally insane at time of murders. So unless the prosecution has their own doctors testify to the opposite, then the jury may side with the defense. Maybe the prosecution will wait for rebuttal to bring in their own doctors.

This case is very interesting as it proceeds, although its also a very very sad one as well so its a tough one to follow along. I may have to take a lot of breaks from it due to the human tragedy aspect taking an emotional toll.

Thanks for sharing that article. Its really interesting to read through that study.

http://www.lsd-journal.net/archives/Volume6/InsanityPlea.pdf

 

[Coldpizza]

New thread

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...olmes-Trial-Discussion-Begins-April-27-2015-5