GUILTY NH - AH, 14, North Conway, 9 October 2013 - #14

Discussion in 'Recently Sentenced and Beyond' started by bessie, Jul 29, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Fireweed

    Fireweed New Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That is the point I am trying to make. This man is not a murderer (at least as far as I can tell). They have not found anything on his property that so far would warrant carrying away his entire house.
     


  2. takeitfromme412

    takeitfromme412 New Member

    Messages:
    1,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    well, I mean of course he could be a murderer, but no, we do not know that, and have no proof of it. However, the police and investigators working this case wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't make sure there was no evidence at or under that house or anywhere on his land if they didn't search for remains though it could be unlikely that there are any there.....
     
  3. Fireweed

    Fireweed New Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes but surely in cases where the house is not a mobile home, they manage to do that successfully. Their argument seems to be that guarding the house 24/7 would be impracticable, and so that is why they need it moved. They are not arguing that they need to move it in order to search under it.

    I understand the defense's worry. If they cut the mobile home in half in order to move it, then evidence could be lost or destroyed.
     
  4. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    All rise. Be seated. Here to preserve evidence. Counsel identify for record.
    ...
    Judge:
    One primary issue and a # of sub-issues, not that significant given the final paragraph of the state's motion. State knows scene, but pls educate me.
     
  5. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Counsels approach bench.

    (No courtroom photos, yet. May be empty.)
     
  6. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    DEF: asks that state takes steps to preserve what may not be under their control (due to the many agencies involved)
     
  7. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    DEF: ask that B thru M be granted

    (Issue with def concerning them having discretion concerning what's important to preserve)

    Judge: I don't have control over hospital...
     
  8. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    DEF: clearly I have no ability to preserve hospital records at this point; state does. That's why I'm asking State to preserve.
     
  9. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Judge: and that would require a separate warrant

    State: I have no control over that
     
  10. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    DEF: I want to start out framing the issue...Nate was arrested based on July 28 (?)... arrgnmt on 29th. I requested affidavits be unsealed. What we were provided with that day was one pc of paper saying Class B felony kidnapping. Since then, I've receive the 8-pg arrest warrant affidavit. That's ALL I'ved rec'd. 9 pages.
     
  11. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Plenty of speculation and innuendo from State that more chrgs to come. I've never been involved in a case where 9 days after arrest I've not rec'd all the materials existing in a case yet. Never been in position where I've had to ask State to preserve crime scene!
     
  12. pinkandgreenmom

    pinkandgreenmom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,189
    Likes Received:
    674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You rock, Poirotry!
     
  13. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nate is entitlted to presumption of innocence; constitutionally to due process. This is this man's home...I need the discovery in this case (to see every single thing to see (*exculpatory as well). WE haven't touched anything, taken a photo, taken a diagram. All thgs we need to do in order to be in a position to defend Nate. We don't need to show state today why this evidence would be exculpatory. There's no argument that State can say that wld show that the crime scene isn't relevant.
     
  14. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    (Previous case...Murray presumed the evidence was relevant and needed preserving.) We know that all that evidence is going to be material. Clearly the allegation is going to be that Nate has held someone on his property. The proximity of his trailer to others up there is going to be relevant (exculpatory)--will be lost if trailer moved. I haven't been there when there has been NO big trailer in front of his house (...haven't been able to see anything, etc.)

    THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE IS THE SCENE--NOT JUST THE HOUSE, THE TRAILER.
     
  15. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The only point State is making is that it is not financially (good) for State to keep evidence at scene. Frankly, that's not Nate's concern. This is his life, State is seeking to put him away for many years.
     
  16. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    STATE: (describing to judge the site of trailer, shipping container, etc.)

    Cntr is divided up into 3 units...middle section the bulk, a third section court is also aware of...

    State is seeking to remove the mobile home and shppg ctr.

    Basis for removal is for prevention of tampering.

    That is a mobile home parked; defendant doesn't own the land. He rents it. My understanding is that he missed his August pymt. He missed it, though there is a 10-day grace period. Our concern is that it might be moved (if he doesn't pay his rent).
     
  17. Fireweed

    Fireweed New Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah apparently in NH no one needs to make a LEGAL argument. Why, the state ought to just say that they do not feel like preserving the crime scene, or that they ran out of toner for the copier and that is why Kibby cannot get any information.
     
  18. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    STATE: The DEF atty's allowed limited access last Friday (walked around perimeter of crime scene). Yesterday could walk around outside.

    The def can't make an argument as to why that...(keeping the scene intact) is important.

    (cites cases in CA and Youngblood case in AZ; when evid potentially useful to defendant ... cannot prevail unless he establishes that state acted in bad faith.

    [sorry, guys, I'm bad at legal typing!]

    The counsel has the best source of info--they have the defendent.

    Def should be denied acc to logic of Youngblood court decision.
     
  19. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    STATE: Unless def can show bad faith on part of police, failure to preserve scene does not equate to (denying?) due process.
     
  20. PoirotryInMotion

    PoirotryInMotion Registered Muser

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    STATE: Placement of trailer and mobile home are not exculpatory.

    I wld ask the shld court grant def's motion, we will take steps to preserve it but def should be advised we can't be responsible for what cld happen (esp if rent can't be paid).

    Judge: That was going to be my quesiton; fencing considered?

    STATE: Yes, we got estimate today that it'd be $12,000

    [!!???!!!]
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice