Mark Sievers Trial General Discussion Thread

Bringing this over from the live trial forum, I don't know how to do the copy format thing so it shows who I'm responding to.

REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF MEDICATE FRAUD committed by Mark Sievers not being brought up during the trial to go toward motive.
Kaen replied to me:
"The fraud case has not been litigated. He is not guilty or innocent, so, what can they bring in? Only allegations. If it had been litigated and he was found guilty, it would definitely go to his character."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When we first heard this, I thought it odd that MS would confess to defrauding Medicare when speaking to Dr.P unless he was sure he was being investigated and it would become public at some point and maybe looking to enlist the help of Dr.P's attorney-wife. I had forgotten about Roy Heilbron (friend/business partner of sorts) in New Mexico being convicted of Medicare Fraud. He's currently in prison and ordered to pay back over $623,000 in restitution.

IMO, while investigating RH, it's probable that TS' practice and MS as office manager were looked at, too. After TS death, RH came out to the Sievers' home with a trailer and left with some things after hanging out with MS.
After MS, while he was in jail, an email (allegedly from MS) was sent out to TS' patients recommending that they continue to buy supplements from RH with an address in Boca Raton, but he lived and was licensed (before it was pulled) in New Mexico. Looks like TS' husband was hooking her up professionally with an unsavory medical "professional". How did RH get access to TS' business computers and email account to do this? We can guess.

So many shenanigans - legal, medical, ethical, moral.

Could any of this be used in trial? If so, it's too late for this trial unless MS decides to grace the court with his testimony.

Patients of slain Dr. Teresa Sievers receive odd email purportedly by Mark Sievers

Santa Fe Cardiologist Sentenced to 51 Months in Federal Prison for Health Care Fraud and Obstruction of Justice Convictions
 
Yes, it's extremely common for trusts to not pay out the principal until the beneficiary is older. Sometimes there will be staggered payouts, like 18, 25, 30. The idea is to allow the beneficiary to mature enough not to blow it all, and so that the inheritance doesn't serve to demotivate the beneficiary so he'll actually finish school, get a job, etc.

But wasn't Ms. Ross's point/line of questioning that Mark Sievers could "contest" the rules of the trust and have it changed to basically anything he wants since he's still living? This is the question that Ms. Lyons did NOT want to answer......her voice was getting softer and softer toward the end.....I hope hearing aid man could hear.

I kinda wish the State would have asked Ms. Lyons, "Did you ever personally advice Mark Sievers that in the event his wife passes away he could change the conditions of the trust?"
 
They just said on CourtTV (in a montage, not a live report) that in the vein of their open marriage Teresa had expressed a sexual fantasy about being with CWW (paraphrasing). Is there any truth to this????
 
Yes, it's extremely common for trusts to not pay out the principal until the beneficiary is older. Sometimes there will be staggered payouts, like 18, 25, 30. The idea is to allow the beneficiary to mature enough not to blow it all, and so that the inheritance doesn't serve to demotivate the beneficiary so he'll actually finish school, get a job, etc.

Isn't that the truth. I've seen them blow it all.
 
Can someone explain to me the line of questioning about Mark's condo in Missouri? I don't understand what point either side was trying to make by questions about it. Was it his love nest? Is that what the defense was trying to imply? That he went there to shack up with CWW?

I think it was an attempt to set CWW up as a man who wanted what MS had. The text about Angie's underwear was an attempt to lead us to think that CWW killed TS because MS had it all, including the wife of CWW-- either a humiliation that deserved retribution or an attempt to take from MS because MS had taken from CWW.
 
I think it was an attempt to set CWW up as a man who wanted what MS had. The text about Angie's underwear was an attempt to lead us to think that CWW killed TS because MS had it all, including the wife of CWW-- either a humiliation that deserved retribution or an attempt to take from MS because MS had taken from CWW.

That did not "compute" with me at all. I wonder if the jury "got it."
 
No CK, no AW, no LS.

Defense didn't put on anything that note worthy, IMO. I have hope now that the State made the most points with the Jury.

Do I think he'll get the DP or LWOP? No, he's a creep neighbor and perverty pervert, but maybe more was needed. We'll see.

It does seem to come down to whether the Jury will believe CWW.

It did not hurt at all that today's defense witness Lyons expressed how dynamic and special Teresa
was and what a bright future she had ahead. Along with two of Teresa's long time friends and her sister, it is now obvious to the Jury that she was very much valued and loved by many people.

As FelicityLemon pointed out-- Not one "character witness" for the defendant?

JMO
 
Good morning. I guess it’s the fact that the only evidence they’ve presented is the word of a convicted felon who committed the actual crime. He’s benefiting from pointing the blame elsewhere (whether there’s actual blame there or not). There’s not one item (presented in court) that ties Mark to it whatsoever. There’s the question/doubt regarding the burner phones, but maybe they were using them for something else. Perhaps he was involved in something sketchy, other than murder.

The one thing that I absolutely do not understand is how CW would be able to bludgeon her to death unless there was genuine hate/rage/anger towards her. It’s one thing to kill someone, it’s another to be SO violent about it. It makes me wonder if there’s more to the CW/TS side of it. Maybe CW was obsessed with her (?). I don’t know , it’s all entirely based on speculation, but other than the burner phones raising SOME doubt, there’s nothing that I’ve seen presented that could get me to find Mark guilty. I’ll add that IMO, he did it. He’s super sleazy, his behavior has been appalling... all of that. But I wouldn’t be able to find him guilty on opinion alone.

Oh, and the money... Mark supposedly knew there was a second person joining CW for this, someone who expected to be paid, yet he doesn’t use a single dollar out of the $50k in the house? A murderer was okay with an IOU? I could see his best friend waiting on an insurance payout, but not JRR.

I’m sorry. I know this is an emotional case and I too am consumed by it. I just hope that justice is served to whomever deserves it.
IMO, I think that the $50 thousand was a "what if" fund in case he had to leave the country all of a sudden and not for anything concerning the payment to the hired killers.
 
It did not hurt at all that today's defense witness Lyons expressed how dynamic and special Teresa
was and what a bright future she had ahead. Along with two of Teresa's long time friends and her sister, it is now obvious to the Jury that she was very much valued and loved by many people.

rsbm

It is interesting that the best character witness for Teresa Sievers was a defense witness who seemed dead set on helping Mark Sievers. I'm so perplexed by her.
 
I think it was an attempt to set CWW up as a man who wanted what MS had. The text about Angie's underwear was an attempt to lead us to think that CWW killed TS because MS had it all, including the wife of CWW-- either a humiliation that deserved retribution or an attempt to take from MS because MS had taken from CWW.

I think it confirmed that Mark is a perverty perv. A man who will take and wear your wife's panties or try to get into bed with the couple.
 
I don’t think there has been any proof that CWW and MS had a sexual relationship. MOO the diary entries of Mark’s sexual affairs are merely more of his wishful thinking. He purchased burner phones for the other two stooges and who is to say that those alleged texts weren’t between him and the other stooges or even other stooges maybe even imaginary ones?
Also MOO it is very telling that he had no character witnesses. No one! Speaks volumes!
 
Another incident of a lawyer's need to be sure to know the answer of a question before asking the witness on the record. And the following rule would be to ask yourself "How sure am I that my client is telling me the truth?"

I'm paraphrasing, but MM asked Dr.P - no, he stated that 'and it was after this/TS' murder that your wife Mrs.Dr.P thought of dropping out of law school?'
Aaaand the answer was with a smile... "No." 'She never thought of dropping out and in fact, it strengthened her determination' - I paraphrased this last sentence, but that was pretty much IT. "IT" being the truth from the man who would know his wife's intent, Dr. P!

Another perfect example of defendant MS lying. Lying not only to other people, but to his own lawyer in his murder trial.
BRILLIANT.

Seriously, if he's convicted, there'll be an appeal on the grounds of... what... something to do with counsel?
my opinion only, of course.
 
SHE WAS NOT PAID FOR HER TESTIMONY.

It came from a State approved & subsidized Witness Assistance Program. Participation requires meeting a hardship criteria. You’re free to have an opinion but you are not permitted to keep characterizing it as something it is not to further your narrative.
Thank you so much for clarifying this, I was going to try but you stated it so much more simple than I would have.
 
Another incident of a lawyer's need to be sure to know the answer of a question before asking the witness on the record. And the following rule would be to ask yourself "How sure am I that my client is telling me the truth?"

I'm paraphrasing, but MM asked Dr.P - no, he stated that 'and it was after this/TS' murder that your wife Mrs.Dr.P thought of dropping out of law school?'
Aaaand the answer was with a smile... "No." 'She never thought of dropping out and in fact, it strengthened her determination' - I paraphrased this last sentence, but that was pretty much IT. "IT" being the truth from the man who would know his wife's intent, Dr. P!

Another perfect example of defendant MS lying. Lying not only to other people, but to his own lawyer in his murder trial.
BRILLIANT.

Seriously, if he's convicted, there'll be an appeal on the grounds of... what... something to do with counsel?
my opinion only, of course.
Thanks for this gem because many of us have been wondering about this. We don’t even have corroboration that Mark met with Mrs P that day hence why an interview with her was never conducted. Mark was probably throwing back beers and shots while the only people who cared about him were left to themselves to mourn Teresa’s death. Maybe that massive sunburn will cause him future pain and suffering?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
163
Guests online
4,024
Total visitors
4,187

Forum statistics

Threads
593,554
Messages
17,989,109
Members
229,165
Latest member
Ameesqt
Back
Top