CONVICTION OVERTURNED GA - Diane McIver, 63, Fatally Shot, Atlanta, 25 Sept 2016 *husband arrested* #2

[YESorNO]

Split Verdict in Tex McIver Murder Trial Rattles Defense Bar
Lawyers took to social media to decry the verdict as inconsistent in acquitting former Fisher & Phillips partner Tex McIver of malice murder but convicting him of felony murder.

"A Fulton County jury’s decision to acquit Atlanta attorney Claud “Tex” McIver of malice murder but convict him of felony murder has put Atlanta’s criminal defense bar on edge.

On Facebook and Twitter and in guest television appearances, criminal defense lawyers, civil litigators and the occasional former prosecutor have decried the former Fisher & Phillips partner’s murder conviction as “inconsistent,” “repugnant” or simply “crap.” The jury convicted McIver of murder for shooting and killing his wife, Diane....

Pate said that, during McIver’s trial, “No one contended he intended to hurt her but did not intend to kill her”—the conclusion he and other lawyers insist is the only way to interpret the jury’s decision to pair a malice murder acquittal with aggravated assault and felony murder convictions.

“The real problem is for people like me who see a verdict like this,” Pate said. “Lawyers don’t like this verdict. [But] they realize it’s almost unappealable.”

McIver’s defense team, Pate continued, included two of the state’s best criminal defense attorneys—Don Samuel and Bruce Harvey—and “one of the smartest judges.”

“It was more or less a clean trial,” he concluded. “They are not going to like me saying that.”...

“The Tex McIver verdict astounds me,” defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant posted on her Facebook page. “How exactly could he not intend to kill her but instead intend to shoot her?”

Samuel said there’s no way to reconcile the verdict with the case he tried.

“It is conceivable you could have an acquittal on malice murder and a conviction on felony murder and aggravated assault,” he said. But that scenario, he explained, would require a jury to conclude that McIver intended to shoot his wife but did not intend to kill her.

“That’s the only way to reconcile the two verdicts,” Samuel said. “I don’t think anybody thinks there was a good factual basis to reach these verdicts.”

The jury “just compromised,” he said.

Internally inconsistent jury verdicts are permissible in Georgia. “I would not say it’s never an appealable issue,” Samuel said. “The case law is not great at this point.”

However, he added, “It is certainly a basis to seek a new trial in front of a judge, which is a different standing than appealing and seeking a reversal.”..."

https://www.law.com/dailyreportonli...-trial-rattles-defense-bar/?cmp=share_twitter
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[YESorNO]

McIver Volunteers to Suspend His Bar Law License

"Atlanta attorney Claud “Tex” McIver is still not ready to surrender his bar license allowing him to practice law in Georgia after being convicted of murdering his wife.

Instead, attorneys for the former Fisher & Phillips partner have filed a motion with the State Bar of Georgia asking for a voluntary interim suspension of the 75-year-old’s bar license pending the outcome of an appeal....

Paula Frederick, the bar’s general counsel who oversees the organization’s lawyer disciplinary actions, confirmed that McIver asked for the voluntary suspension. “He will remain in good standing until the [state Supreme] Court enters an order on the petition,” she said....

McIver defense lawyer Bruce Harvey said shortly after the verdict that there is “no question” McIver will appeal. Harvey co-counsel Don Samuel also said to expect a motion for a new trial.

McIver’s bar license has remained in good standing since he fatally shot his wife, Diane McIver, on Sept. 25, 2016...."

https://www.law.com/dailyreportonline/2018/04/27/mciver-volunteers-to-suspend-his-bar-law-license/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[YESorNO]

'Breakdown’ podcast: Did the jury just get it wrong on McIver?
New episode explores opening arguments, confusing outcome

"The public is likely to see Tex McIver just one more time — at his sentencing hearing on May 23. After that, the 75-year-old man will disappear into the state prison system to live out his days.

The final episode of this season of “Breakdown,” now available (podcast player below), takes you through the climax of the seven-week McIver murder trial.

Episode 11 explores the confused verdict and concludes that the jury did not fully understand the law it was trying to apply. In sum, the jurors were confronted with two crimes of intent: malice murder, which charges that the defendant meant to kill, and aggravated assault, which charges that the defendant meant to do harm. In acquitting McIver of malice murder but finding him guilty of aggravated assault, the jury in effect concluded that McIver meant to shoot his wife, Diane, but not to kill her.

The podcast episode also discusses the consequences of the defense strategy of clearing McIver of the most serious charges against him — malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony...."

https://www.myajc.com/news/local/br...he-jury-misunderstand/HFdY3uuWkLCoiaiXU6mbkN/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[YESorNO]

After Tex McIver’s conviction, what happens to Diane’s money?

"...some estate lawyers said that he could still be entitled to half of the couple’s beloved Putnam County ranch, which played a starring role in his six-week long trial...

The McIvers had what’s called a “joint tenancy with right of survivorship,” meaning Tex McIver could still keep ownership of 50 percent of the property. Each of the McIvers owned 50 percent of the ranch, according to property records. Though Tex owned the ranch before he and Diane married, in November 2005, he deeded half of the property to his wife.

“He owns one-half of that land, no matter what,” Atlanta attorney Kasey Libby said. “His half-interest is not affected by the murder because it is not property Diane owned when she died.”...

Attorney Morgan Akin said Diane McIver’s estate should now be treated as though her husband died first.

“Even if there’s a joint tenancy with a right of survivorship, he forfeits that and it’s treated as though he pre-deceased her,” Akin said. “That means the property would remain in the estate.”..."

https://www.myajc.com/news/local/af...t-happens-diane-money/YmHtT1H2bfxZtTbXFiY1CN/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[YESorNO]

Natalie Rubino@NatalieCBS46
3h3 hours ago
I hope you’re not sick of the Tex McIver case just yet. With so many twists and turns how could you be? CBS’s 48 Hours will be airing a one hour episode on the case tomorrow at 10pm. You don’t want to miss it. #48hours #texmciver #cbs


Sneak peek: The Last Ride Home

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/sneak-peek-the-last-ride-home/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

alsleuther Maybe they will show the saloon that you want to see???

 

[Tortoise]

Split Verdict in Tex McIver Murder Trial Rattles Defense Bar
Lawyers took to social media to decry the verdict as inconsistent in acquitting former Fisher & Phillips partner Tex McIver of malice murder but convicting him of felony murder.

"A Fulton County jury’s decision to acquit Atlanta attorney Claud “Tex” McIver of malice murder but convict him of felony murder has put Atlanta’s criminal defense bar on edge.

On Facebook and Twitter and in guest television appearances, criminal defense lawyers, civil litigators and the occasional former prosecutor have decried the former Fisher & Phillips partner’s murder conviction as “inconsistent,” “repugnant” or simply “crap.” The jury convicted McIver of murder for shooting and killing his wife, Diane....

Pate said that, during McIver’s trial, “No one contended he intended to hurt her but did not intend to kill her”—the conclusion he and other lawyers insist is the only way to interpret the jury’s decision to pair a malice murder acquittal with aggravated assault and felony murder convictions.

“The real problem is for people like me who see a verdict like this,” Pate said. “Lawyers don’t like this verdict. [But] they realize it’s almost unappealable.”

McIver’s defense team, Pate continued, included two of the state’s best criminal defense attorneys—Don Samuel and Bruce Harvey—and “one of the smartest judges.”

“It was more or less a clean trial,” he concluded. “They are not going to like me saying that.”...

“The Tex McIver verdict astounds me,” defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant posted on her Facebook page. “How exactly could he not intend to kill her but instead intend to shoot her?”

Samuel said there’s no way to reconcile the verdict with the case he tried.

“It is conceivable you could have an acquittal on malice murder and a conviction on felony murder and aggravated assault,” he said. But that scenario, he explained, would require a jury to conclude that McIver intended to shoot his wife but did not intend to kill her.

“That’s the only way to reconcile the two verdicts,” Samuel said. “I don’t think anybody thinks there was a good factual basis to reach these verdicts.”

The jury “just compromised,” he said.

Internally inconsistent jury verdicts are permissible in Georgia. “I would not say it’s never an appealable issue,” Samuel said. “The case law is not great at this point.”

However, he added, “It is certainly a basis to seek a new trial in front of a judge, which is a different standing than appealing and seeking a reversal.”..."

https://www.law.com/dailyreportonli...-trial-rattles-defense-bar/?cmp=share_twitter
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm surprised Samuel is speaking about it publicly.

 

[YESorNO]

That interview was rather frightening, it won't surprise me at all if one or more of the convictions are overturned based on nothing more than the jury didn't seem to know what the heck they were doing. I'd love to hear from the foreman or at least a few other jurors; based only on what 61 says I'm fairly aghast she had the freedom of another in her hands.

They were stuck on intent but all along he intended to shoot her, but not to kill her because the state didn't prove that but if he had his finger on the trigger he meant to shoot her but it wasn't malice murder...oh my. And why should Dani Jo be charged and for what? I didn't see the FB interview, could she even explain why she thought DJ deserved to be charged with anything?

BBM I think she did explain it in the interview with Vinnie in the car- her explanation starts @ about 53:14. She stated that Dani Jo should have been charged- she gave an eg.- if it were 2 coloreds inside the car and that happened, wouldn't they both been charged, so why wasn't Dani Jo charged with something? So, IMO, she thought that Dani Jo could have been charged as an accessory (because she could have done things better/differently that night- she was reckless also- my words). When she asked the State why she wasn't charged, they said that the detectives didn't "do their homework correctly".

Can they use any interview done by the jurors after the verdict on Tex's appeal?. I don't see how they can do that. The lawyers can't find fault in how they came to their decision because the jurors were asked to come to their own verdict- that's why they are there. It's their own conclusions on what evidence presented to use or not use. How they came to it is incidental, IMO. You can't tell the jury how to do that- it's up to them, IMO.

At first I was scratching my head at the explanation of the verdict,...:waitasec:... but then I thought about it and listened to juror's 61 interviews again and again- really listened to what she was saying/ how she was saying it and then I understood how they came to their verdict.

The jurors were asked to come to a verdict, and no matter how they came to it, it's the jurors verdict, IMO. The jurors followed the Ga laws and that's what they did to come up with the verdict. I understood how both jurors came to their conclusions/verdict. They, well at least juror 61, also used their life experiences that helped them figure out what the verdict, in their eyes, should be. The State did not give them enough evidence for the verdict of malice because they really didn't know the intent- did he do it on purpose or not? but they understood that Tex was reckless in how he handled the gun when he should have known better( and he was reckless, IMO) and he caused Diane's death, so reckless coincides with Felony murder in Ga law. What other verdict could they have come up with? :dunno:

 

[turaj]

Natalie Rubino@NatalieCBS46
3h3 hours ago
I hope you’re not sick of the Tex McIver case just yet. With so many twists and turns how could you be? CBS’s 48 Hours will be airing a one hour episode on the case tomorrow at 10pm. You don’t want to miss it. #48hours #texmciver #cbs


Sneak peek: The Last Ride Home

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/sneak-peek-the-last-ride-home/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

alsleuther Maybe they will show the saloon that you want to see???

That looks like it will be interesting...looks like Ann Schwall is providing much input into this show.

 

[steve temple]

I have just watched the revocation of bond hearing for Tex Mciver. This occurred after a gun was found in his sock drawer. I was shocked that Mciver was able to get his Lawyer- Mr Maples to act in a way that the Judge said was totally inappropriate and could not be excused or justified. Tammy Johnson ,who had been put in charge of Dianne's estate by Tex, was proved to be lying under oath for the benefit of Tex. The McIver team also accused both Mr Correy and gentleman who cleaned for the Mcivers -Mr Hugh-of planting the gun in the sock drawer. Mr Hugh who had cleaned their condos and cars for years was almost in tears on the stand because he loved both Tex and Dianne and could not believe that Tex was doing this to him. The Judge said that he was absolutely certain that neither of these men had anything to do with planting the gun in Tex's sock drawer.
I was astounded that Tex Mciver was happy to throw anyone,rich or poor, under the bus and was also able to persuade people to lie and behave badly for his benefit.
This was an eye-opener for me and also showed why the prosecution became so passionate about his case.

 

[Tortoise]

I have just watched the revocation of bond hearing for Tex Mciver. This occurred after a gun was found in his sock drawer. I was shocked that Mciver was able to get his Lawyer- Mr Maples to act in a way that the Judge said was totally inappropriate and could not be excused or justified. Tammy Johnson ,who had been put in charge of Dianne's estate by Tex, was proved to be lying under oath for the benefit of Tex. The McIver team also accused both Mr Correy and gentleman who cleaned for the Mcivers of planting the gun in the sock draw. The gentelman who cleaned their condos and cars was almost in tears on the stand because he loved both Tex and Dianne and could not believe that Tex was doing this to him. The Judge said that he was absolutely certain that neither of these men had anything to do with planting the gun in Tex's sock draw.
I was astounded that Tex Mciver was happy to throw anyone under the bus and was also able to persuade people to lie for him and to behave badly for his benefit.
This was an eye-opener for me and also showed why the prosecution became so passionate about his case.

Lack of conscience. It fits totally with being a murderer.

 

[turaj]

I have just watched the revocation of bond hearing for Tex Mciver. This occurred after a gun was found in his sock drawer. I was shocked that Mciver was able to get his Lawyer- Mr Maples to act in a way that the Judge said was totally inappropriate and could not be excused or justified. Tammy Johnson ,who had been put in charge of Dianne's estate by Tex, was proved to be lying under oath for the benefit of Tex. The McIver team also accused both Mr Correy and gentleman who cleaned for the Mcivers -Mr Hugh-of planting the gun in the sock drawer. Mr Hugh who had cleaned their condos and cars for years was almost in tears on the stand because he loved both Tex and Dianne and could not believe that Tex was doing this to him. The Judge said that he was absolutely certain that neither of these men had anything to do with planting the gun in Tex's sock drawer.
I was astounded that Tex Mciver was happy to throw anyone,rich or poor, under the bus and was also able to persuade people to lie and behave badly for his benefit.
This was an eye-opener for me and also showed why the prosecution became so passionate about his case.

Yes I think watching those pre trial hearings really tells a person about the true Tex...and I think some logic was ignored in deliberations because clearly the jury (at least based on what he have heard from 61) really did not like him...no one except Annie, Ann Schwall, Austin and of course his sister Dixie seemed to like him at all...

 

[turaj]

Interesting last AJC podcast linked above is really good. The reporter ran into Harvey after the allen charge in the hall and Harvey said something like "I hate the F...allen charge" and I tend to agree with him. I find it hard to believe that in 2 hours the majority who wanted the invol. agreed to move UP to felony. I also find it interesting that none of those jurors are speaking...also mentioned is as they left the jury room after the verdict where the majority did not want to talk to press juror 61 yelled out "He is guilty...he is going to jail"...leaves one wondering. Personally I don't think Rucker's muddy water cleared up enough to call the jurors' attention to it at the end of his closing.

 

[MsArk]

Interesting last AJC podcast linked above is really good. The reporter ran into Harvey after the allen charge in the hall and Harvey said something like "I hate the F...allen charge" and I tend to agree with him. I find it hard to believe that in 2 hours the majority who wanted the invol. agreed to move UP to felony. I also find it interesting that none of those jurors are speaking...also mentioned is as they left the jury room after the verdict where the majority did not want to talk to press juror 61 yelled out "He is guilty...he is going to jail"...leaves one wondering. Personally I don't think Rucker's muddy water cleared up enough to call the jurors' attention to it at the end of his closing.

BBM
I’ve never been one to speak poorly about a jury simply based on a verdict...and I’m not now...but Juror 61 sure is extra.

 

[turaj]

BBM
I’ve never been one to speak poorly about a jury simply based on a verdict...and I’m not now...but Juror 61 sure is extra.

I think she is going to say and do enough to get herself and possible this verdict in some big trouble. She was always late...and one could conclude busy and over extended and now she has nothing but time to ride around with Vinnie or conduct a smoke filled interview from her home??? I don't like Tex or his group however a man's freedom was at stake and I don't know how you go from Invol to felony in less than 2 hours...one would have to think some miracle happened in that jury room.

 

[MsArk]

Have we discussed how Rucker had “KKK” on his display during closings? What was that? I searched for a photo to include in this post but couldn’t find one. Why would he do that if not meant to be inflammatory?

 

[turaj]

Have we discussed how Rucker had “KKK” on his display during closings? What was that? I searched for a photo to include in this post but couldn’t find one. Why would he do that if not meant to be inflammatory?

are you kidding...sorry I missed that...I did hear him reference BLM and I believe he got in that comment about "boy" but KKK? If that were up there I can't believe no objections? Clearly I felt he played the race card and juror 61 took him right up on that...as I heard it only 3 black jurors were in the final 12 and we heard from 2 of them. No question Tex is a racist to some degree and I felt that loud and clear when he was talking to Ann Schwall from jail and asked about Mr. Hyde (the car detail ...general errand boy) and said something like he is a "little bird" and would be lost without Tex and Diane...I did not take it as real concern. Then they tried to set him up with that gun in the sock drawer. Such messed up and self absorbed people...I suppose that is what made it easier for so many jurors to do a 180 and go with felony?

 

[turaj]

Have we discussed how Rucker had “KKK” on his display during closings? What was that? I searched for a photo to include in this post but couldn’t find one. Why would he do that if not meant to be inflammatory?

Well you got my curiosity up ...for sure at minute 49 of that closing at the bottom of the page under BLM he has printed on its own line KKK.....why? I never heard one mention of that in this trial....I have not heard defense say anything about this either in the aftermath.. I simply cannot believe this...Rucker did this to insure at least he would have 3 jurors with him. I am so turned off about this verdict...and remember I cannot stand Tex. I just don't like how Rucker and the State got there.

 

[Legally Bland]

It's hard to make out at times, but at this point (and others) it certainly looks like KKK.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=454di0oiw20

 

[Gardenista]

Have we discussed how Rucker had “KKK” on his display during closings? What was that? I searched for a photo to include in this post but couldn’t find one. Why would he do that if not meant to be inflammatory?

Wow I missed that because I usually just listen. IMO, Rucker is evil.

 

[turaj]

It's hard to make out at times, but at this point (and others) it certainly looks like KKK.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=454di0oiw20

It is not hard to make out...as he was speaking he went thru all of the other entries on that board...he was hoping they would see it but did not include it in his "oration"....I think that was trying to incite some feelings and there is no basis to have that on there as unless someone can direct me to it KKK was never mentioned in this trial. This made me so made I sent an email to Don Samuel just on the 1% chance they did not know that was there...frankly I hope they get those whole trial thrown out. I am stunned that some of those professional people on that jury (per the profiles) did not speak up about some of this stuff and hold to their thoughts of invol which seems to be a verdict that could withstand critique.