Cool Cats
I DEMAND COFFEE
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 11,698
- Reaction score
- 88,642
I find this very interesting and I’m obsessed with speculating about contents of the “Box of Important Stuff”
After all, it was labeled by “someone” as Important Stuff.
Statement from Defense:
“which the Defense thought may contain forms or documents relevant to the present action.”
Statement from Prosecutors:
”...it (the box) did not contain any such forms or documents as those sought by Defendant ...”
MOO
Possibly Defense worded motion poorly, too narrow.
Prosecutor worded response very carefully.
Attorneys use words, definitions, to their advantage. Not saying anyone lies, but “word games” are known to happen.
The contents of the box must be something DEFINED as other than documents or forms, items such as papers, receipts, hand written notes, letters, or information downloaded and printed regarding ...almost anything ... items that were not a document or form by DEFINITION.
Or
Contents of the box are items that ‘do not pertain to the present action’ but perhaps pertain to a future action, or can be a building block in some way relevant to one of other 4 Defendants actions.
Speculation as to exactly what is in the box could be endless
Defense Attorney may have lost sight of what was happening here and now this evidence has come in due to good work by Prosecutors.
BBM
MOO
Ritas's Attorney:
July 20-19 we asked for a list of copies of the entire contents and documents contained in the tub marked important stuff that was seized from Angela Wagner in which the State claims does contain the custody documents allegedly notarized by Rita Newcomb. We are searching for certain documents that the prosecution is aware of previously dated 8 something which these alleged custody documents, but actually they're guardian documents.
Judge: They're what?
Rita's Attorney:
It's actually titled guardian summarized as custody documents.
Judge: So you've asked for copies?
Rita's Attorney:
I want to know what is in this box where they found the original---I put original I'm not sure they are original---copies of something that was copied from a Texas Website talking about guardianship. But there's others that we're looking at, hand written signed on dates she notarized, some of that were hand written dated on the dates in which she notarized the printed document.
Judge:
Ok you found out about these through discovery? And then you asked for copies of them?
Rita's Attorney:
Yes, well we want to know what was in them that particular tub of materials that I'm looking for. I don't need to know everything that's in it, it's just these 3 handwritten (similar?)
documents. Documents which are dated the same dates as the ones printed out--- the subject of which the documents---same date as the documents that are the subject of this particular trial.
Judge:
I guess maybe I'm not following, you found out about these documents through discovery?
Rita's Attorney:
Well yes through search warrants that were issued for those---I think it represented prosecution that they had received this tub marked important stuff.
Later Canepa tells the Judge that Rita's attorney found out about this box marked important stuff from "inventory of contents from the Search Warrant" and from "discussions from Angela Wagner on phone calls." I assume Angela told Rita then Rita told her attorney.
Last edited: Sep 10, 2019