It is currently Sun Apr 28, 2024 7:26 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1018 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 47, 48, 49, 50, 51  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 2:43 am
Posts: 86
Mike McDaniel has posted an update
https://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress. ... -backward/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:48 am
Posts: 64
Unless Nelson is seriously considering striking Good's and Donnelly's testimony for violating the rule of sequestration, I don't see why she can't put off any hearing on sanctions until after the trial, as she did for the defense's motions for sanctions. And if she is seriously considering striking their testimony, I think she's nuts. There's not a thing I can see to suggest Good's and Donnelly's testimony was tainted by any violation. In Wright v. State, 473 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1985), the Florida supreme court said:

Quote:
This Court has frequently pointed out that the rule of sequestration is intended to prevent a witness's testimony from being influenced by the testimony of other witnesses in the proceeding. We have expressly stated the rule must not be enforced in such a manner that it produces injustice. Further, we have recognized that enforcement of the rule against a defendant seeking to introduce the testimony of a witness who has heard testimony in violation of the rule implicates the defendant's sixth amendment right to present witnesses in his own behalf. Before it excludes testimony on the ground that the sequestration rule was violated, the trial court must determine that the witness's testimony was affected by other witnesses' testimony to the extent that it substantially differed from what it would have been had the witness not heard the testimony.


(Citations omitted.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 7:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2012 8:46 am
Posts: 617
I hope the defense is not over confident and ending their case too soon...eliminating the tox and the Crump issue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:35 pm
Posts: 1056
taurus wrote:
I hope the defense is not over confident and ending their case too soon...eliminating the tox and the Crump issue.

Were I West (OMara doesn't have the ____) I'd introduce whatever I wanted and FORCE Nelson to play her hand on the record again and again...

West looks like he's close to retirement age and I sense the state does not want to push involvement with the bar!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
chipbennett wrote:
So, what were the end-of-the-night fireworks I'm seeing everyone mentioning? What happened right at the end? Besides yet-more-reversible-error of not allowing the text messages into evidence, it sounds like Nelson lost a bit of control of her courtroom, or something?
liesel wrote:
She didn't rule yet on the texts or the animation.

You really have to see the replay video. There is no way to accurately describe it. West was very passionate in his arguments about the texts. Very. And went through the whole discovery thing, the impossible hours, etc. He even said he didn't know how much longer he could keep up this pace. (See Hornsby tweet above about his complaint about the pace.) There was more. There was even Guy asking for an apology from West!

MOM had said he couldn't possibly be ready in the morning because of how late they went tonight, etc. Judge ended up leaving in a huff with West still talking and MOM trying to wave him off. Seriously - watch the video.


I saw the 40-second version that D-man posted. That was appalling on its own. Then I saw the 16-minute version that Sundance posted. Utterly astonishing. West read Nelson the riot act, and she knows it. West was absolutely right, and Nelson knows it.

O'Mara's and West's objections were off the record, since Nelson had already recessed. Will the defense begin this morning with formal objections to the trial pace?

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Posts: 4269
G'morning all but Nelson. :89

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:35 pm
Posts: 1056
chipbennett wrote:
...Then I saw the 16-minute version that Sundance posted. Utterly astonishing. West read Nelson the riot act, and she knows it. West was absolutely right, and Nelson knows it.

O'Mara's and West's objections were off the record, since Nelson had already recessed. Will the defense begin this morning with formal objections to the trial pace?

The original objection to the time was on the record when Nelson announced what time they would start this morning, IIRC. Now Nelson has resolved all time restraints by providing the defense with an extra hour today through her revised schedule to NOT start an HOUR EARLY!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Posts: 4269
kbp, I understand what you're writing/saying - in this case the judge is fixated on authentication, not relevance. And I know you understand what I've been writing/saying, admitting and excluding evidence. The disconnect is I'm suggesting the bigger picture and you're suggesting the case is not on point. You're right, it's not on point, there are different circumstances. But in the larger picture of including/excluding, Williams was a big case and has a lot of cases that cite it since 1959. In saying "reverse-Williams", Hornsby was asserting the judge was wrong for not including the evidence. There are cases that are closer to being on point, and I'm confident the defense will find them without my help. ;)

If anyone else is interested in finding cases, Google Scholar is free. You can start by using the Williams citation as a search term, if that's the type of case you want to find. Good luck!

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Posts: 4269
waltherppk wrote:

Thanks, waltherppk! :)

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Posts: 4269
chipbennett wrote:

I saw the 40-second version that D-man posted. That was appalling on its own. Then I saw the 16-minute version that Sundance posted. Utterly astonishing. West read Nelson the riot act, and she knows it. West was absolutely right, and Nelson knows it.

O'Mara's and West's objections were off the record, since Nelson had already recessed. Will the defense begin this morning with formal objections to the trial pace?


For those who aren't familiar with normal courtroom decorum - To those who are familiar, like Chip and regular court watchers, what Nelson did last night was as shocking and appalling as jumping up on the bench with a hula hoop and roller blades while a witness was testifying tearfully.

Chip, I don't know if you read back but Hornsby pointed out that West's complaint about not being physically able to keep up is grounds for a mistrial. Not that Nelson would grant it, but it's certainly reversible error. Defendants are entitled to good, zealous, representation. The pace Nelson has them going, he's not getting the best his lawyers can provide when they're not constantly flogged. Also according to Hornsby (because I was busy venting), most of the incident was recorded; the court reporter was typing on. Keep in mind, he/she probably gets a lot of work from West and MOM. ;)

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 7:11 pm
Posts: 82
Location: NJ
Appalling is a perfect word for this entire charade.

_________________
The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant - Robespierre


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Posts: 4269
Good morning, CinnamonToast! Glad you made it!

Yes, this persecution has cost the state a ton of money, a lot less than LE to handle any actual law-breaking if they had followed the law and not charged. Local news has reported people canceling hotel reservations because they don't want to be in or near Orlando especially, but some other areas too on a smaller scale, when the GZ trial ends. Scared of riots.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Posts: 4269
We should probably head over to the trial discussion thread, everyone. Rumpole will be doing roll call any minute now. ;)

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2012 8:46 am
Posts: 617
It appears Shellie's case was postponed again.

07/09/2013 MOCO MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE
07/09/2013 ORGR ORDER GRANTING CONTINUANCE
07/09/2013 DKSN DOCKET SOUNDING [A] - DATE: 08/21/2013 - TIME: 0900AM - CTRM: 5C

http://www.seminoleclerk.org/Crimina...92012CF001792A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 9:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
chipbennett wrote:

I saw the 40-second version that D-man posted. That was appalling on its own. Then I saw the 16-minute version that Sundance posted. Utterly astonishing. West read Nelson the riot act, and she knows it. West was absolutely right, and Nelson knows it.

O'Mara's and West's objections were off the record, since Nelson had already recessed. Will the defense begin this morning with formal objections to the trial pace?
liesel wrote:
For those who aren't familiar with normal courtroom decorum - To those who are familiar, like Chip and regular court watchers, what Nelson did last night was as shocking and appalling as jumping up on the bench with a hula hoop and roller blades while a witness was testifying tearfully.


Full disclosure: this is the first trial I've followed this closely. I'm just relying on common sense to know that Nelson's behavior was utterly inappropriate.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 9:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Posts: 4269
MJW wrote:
Unless Nelson is seriously considering striking Good's and Donnelly's testimony for violating the rule of sequestration, I don't see why she can't put off any hearing on sanctions until after the trial, as she did for the defense's motions for sanctions. And if she is seriously considering striking their testimony, I think she's nuts. There's not a thing I can see to suggest Good's and Donnelly's testimony was tainted by any violation. In Wright v. State, 473 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1985), the Florida supreme court said:


Quote:
This Court has frequently pointed out that the rule of sequestration is intended to prevent a witness's testimony from being influenced by the testimony of other witnesses in the proceeding. We have expressly stated the rule must not be enforced in such a manner that it produces injustice. Further, we have recognized that enforcement of the rule against a defendant seeking to introduce the testimony of a witness who has heard testimony in violation of the rule implicates the defendant's sixth amendment right to present witnesses in his own behalf. Before it excludes testimony on the ground that the sequestration rule was violated, the trial court must determine that the witness's testimony was affected by other witnesses' testimony to the extent that it substantially differed from what it would have been had the witness not heard the testimony.

(Citations omitted.)

Hi, MJW! Glad to see you here at RT. I'm a fan of your posts here and TalkLeft. :)

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:00 pm
Posts: 288
O'Mara to Guy in Open Court, "May I play with your doll" ??? :84 :84 :84


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 2:41 pm
Posts: 270
Live stream live again, looks like a press conference about to happen

_________________
Took my time machine into the shop for service and they said they'd get on it first thing last week.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Posts: 4269
I was afk again; if I don't get dinner on the table soon, my family will report me to Corey. :)

From trial thread:

mbtb - animation can only be used as demonstrative aid in closing; not admitted as evidence the jury can review repeatedly in jury room.

realitycheck - do you have any info that the investigation may be about Crump, or just your own guess/logic? TIA

unitron - my understanding from others is that he was FDLE and arrested GZ when he was out with the buddy, underage drinking sweep, blah blah.

SheStone - I think the state is giving up on rebuttal. Yeah, they discussed maybe discussing it tomorrow, if I understood them, but I think it's over.

realitycheck - the jury does not get informed about sentences and if they otherwise know, are not to consider them in rendering verdict.

kbp - :Gslap waiting for the smoking gun in closing! :Gslap

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Arizona
What are the charges? I missed it. Too fast.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1018 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 47, 48, 49, 50, 51  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 146 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group