Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #186

[sunshineray]

The defense filings are absolutely untrustworthy. From the Franks:

View attachment 512121
The quoted passage is at best a hyperbolic snit rant. At worst a flat out lie.

A slightly more professional statement of point 3 would be;

“Richard owns a particular gun which the state claims is uniquely able to produce the impacts and scratches found on a cartridge of the same caliber found between the victims at the crime scene. We will dispute ‘uniquely able.’”

Amen, spoken like an adult, I understood everything you said too

 

[sunshineray]

We are obviously reading the constitution differently and will never agree on this fact. I have genuinely never encountered a single person who was opposed to transparency and public accountability within the court system.

Unless it jeopardizes a case being tried fairly for all. Learning about most of the evidence (because you will always be given glimpses by certain filings) and theories should be done in the courtroom not on social media. It's a new age and adjustments need to be taken to ensure fair trials. MO

 

[girlhasnoname]

But yet the Defense wanted equal treatment? Even judges are human. This judge has shown great restraint in this case. Maybe she should has sanctioned BR, right then and there, for disrespectfully yelling at her in court, (paraphrasing, in case I miss a word) "You know nothing about this trial!"?

Would the defense have felt better then? Not a chance. IMO he did that to get her on record losing her cool with him. It didn't work so I guess "ding dong" and apparently mean faces were all they had, as far as that stuff goes.
AJMO

So agree, I've never seen a Defense Team be so disrespectful to a Judge or the Court. It's sacrosanct, an unspoken rule that these attorneys with years of experience should well know.

JMO

 

[Jade]

I'll add a couple more links

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/2022/02/18/mycase-search-how-look-up-court-cases-indiana/

https://www.hecweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Open-Door-Citizen-Guide.pdf

https://www.in.gov/sboa/files/Public_Access_Laws_in_IN_Presentation_LBritt.pdf

Public Records

www.in.gov

Appeals are available to the public = opinions and oral arguments
Even the federal cases are available to the public for a price.

Where does it say attorneys need to dumb down to lower grade level to accommodate the reading public as asserted to defend the juvenile writing of the Defense?

I’m aware that documents can be acquired by the public. I disagree that they are filed with the public in mind rather than their client and the court system.

It’s the Defense have to do filings so the lowest level of the potential possible reading audience is accommodated reasoning instead of typical court filings and professional language I don’t believe.

all imo

 

[FrostedGlass]

Where does it say attorneys need to dumb down to lower grade level to accommodate the reading public as asserted to defend the juvenile writing of the Defense?

I’m aware that documents can be acquired by the public. I disagree that they are filed with the public in mind rather than their client and the court system.

It’s the Defense have to do filings so the lowest level of the potential possible reading audience is accommodated reasoning instead of typical court filings and professional language I don’t believe.

all imo

It was my opinion.

Many, if not most of the cases I follow involve people who aren't highly educated.
Many are drop-outs.
I'm sure they have an interest in their cases.
I believe they have a right to know what's going on.
If motions are written in simple language, they are more likely to understand.
I don't see a problem with that.
Apparently you do.
I'm ok with that.
The end.

 

[Jade]

We are obviously reading the constitution differently and will never agree on this fact. I have genuinely never encountered a single person who was opposed to transparency and public accountability within the court system.

The statement was justifying and asserting the Defense is intentionally dumbing down for the benefit of the lowest level of reading for the eventual public viewing.

Instead of using the complex knowledge and its language required to defend a client at this level.

Transparency or public accountability within a court system is an entirely different topic that is not discussed here.

If I’m in RA's position I say who cares about what the public reads write lawyer stuff for me.

all imo

 

[Jade]

It was my opinion.

Many, if not most of the cases I follow involve people who aren't highly educated.
Many are drop-outs.
I'm sure they have an interest in their cases.
I believe they have a right to know what's going on.
If motions are written in simple language, they are more likely to understand.
I don't see a problem with that.
Apparently you do.
I'm ok with that.
The end.

I believe that is why we pay for public defenders so in fairness they can understand the charges as explained to them and so they can participate in their defense.

I hope it's the end, lol.


all imo

 

[Emma Peel]

This issue with Baston does not rise to the level of an Original Action IMO. More games being played by the D.

JMO

I don't think we have enough information to know what is the issue with Baston.

Ostensibly, (re: Baston's subpoena and witness transport issue) the State made misleading statements on Court papers.

Why would that be related to an Original Action?

****************

The challenge is ... if Gull has become a fact witness, she'd not be able to rule in the trial AND be a witness.

That's pretty straightforward.

The solution is recusal. Same old same old; its up to Gull to recuse as required by both the
IN Rules of Evidence (605) and the IN Code of Judicial Conduct (2.11).

What that looks like in practice ... I guess we wait and see.

JMHO

 

[TTF14]

I don't think we have enough information to know what is the issue with Baston.

Ostensibly, (re: Baston's subpoena and witness transport issue) the State made misleading statements on Court papers.

Why would that be related to an Original Action?

****************

The challenge is ... if Gull has become a fact witness, she'd not be able to rule in the trial AND be a witness.

That's pretty straightforward.

The solution is recusal. Same old same old; its up to Gull to recuse as required by both the
IN Rules of Evidence (605) and the IN Code of Judicial Conduct (2.11).

What that looks like in practice ... I guess we wait and see.

JMHO

Pretty brilliant lawyering. IMO

 

[sunshineray]

It was my opinion.

Many, if not most of the cases I follow involve people who aren't highly educated.
Many are drop-outs.
I'm sure they have an interest in their cases.
I believe they have a right to know what's going on.
If motions are written in simple language, they are more likely to understand.
I don't see a problem with that.
Apparently you do.
I'm ok with that.
The end.

They should have their lawyers there to explain anything they don't understand, so no dumbing down on court papers would be necessary. MO

 

[susiQ]

Pretty brilliant lawyering. IMO

Do we smell a “Checkmate?”

 

[Jade]

Pretty brilliant lawyering. IMO

Not if your their client. Nice showboat desperation move though for clicks and giggles.

all imo

 

[Caylee Advocate]

Do we smell a “Checkmate?”

I see it more of having the last word for some, regardless of being right or wrong.

I really do wish Abby and Libby could go back to front and center. <modsnip>

 

[StarryStarryNight]

It was my opinion.

Many, if not most of the cases I follow involve people who aren't highly educated.
Many are drop-outs.
I'm sure they have an interest in their cases.
I believe they have a right to know what's going on.
If motions are written in simple language, they are more likely to understand.
I don't see a problem with that.
Apparently you do.
I'm ok with that.
The end.

Motions aren’t written for clients either. They are written for other legal professionals. That is a fact.
Professional defense attorneys would recognize if their client doesn’t have the capacity to understand and sit down with them and explain things. They would not dumb down things for their legal colleagues because their client can’t get it.
This defense team is terribly deficient. They are ding dongs. Their words, not mine.

My opinion

 

[WildHuncher]

Motions aren’t written for clients either. They are written for other legal professionals. That is a fact.
Professional defense attorneys would recognize if their client doesn’t have the capacity to understand and sit down with them and explain things. They would not dumb down things for their legal colleagues because their client can’t get it.
This defense team is terribly deficient. They are ding dongs. Their words, not mine.

My opinion

They yearn for promotion to ding dong.

 

[legalmomma]

New pre-trial hearing dates set for Delphi murders case The rescheduling comes after Judge Gull cancelled the pre-trial hearings that were originally set to be held in May.
New pre-trial hearing dates set for Delphi murders case

Following the cancellation of the originally scheduled three-day hearing back in May, Judge Frances Gull has now re-scheduled the pre-trial hearing to July 30, 31 and August 1.
The hearings will tackle nearly a dozen different motions from both the prosecutor and defense on various issues including motions to suppress evidence and other motions to admit evidence.
These hearings will not include the unusual motion the defense filed earlier this week, in which they once again asked Gull to step down because they intend to call her as a witness in the future.

 

[Spartygirl]

 

[arielilane]

Gull on Friday scheduled a three-day hearing set to begin July 30 in the case of Richard Allen, 51, of Delphi.

...

Judge in Delphi murders case schedules 3-day hearing

Judge Frances Gull has scheduled a new hearing in the Delphi murders case. Gull on Friday scheduled a three-day hearing.

www.wishtv.com

Updated: Jun 21, 2024 / 05:52 PM EST

 

[grannygates]

The statement was justifying and asserting the Defense is intentionally dumbing down for the benefit of the lowest level of reading for the eventual public viewing.

Instead of using the complex knowledge and its language required to defend a client at this level.

Transparency or public accountability within a court system is an entirely different topic that is not discussed here.

If I’m in RA's position I say who cares about what the public reads write lawyer stuff for me.

all imo

My comment was about open courts and accessibility. I don’t understand your responses to me now. Anyways, “dumbing it down” would be referred to as writing in plain language. I actually had to take a course in it when I started working in the justice system to ensure our documents and communications could be read by everyone.

 

[Jade]

My comment was about open courts and accessibility. I don’t understand your responses to me now. Anyways, “dumbing it down” would be referred to as writing in plain language. I actually had to take a course in it when I started working in the justice system to ensure our documents and communications could be read by everyone.

Ok then have a good night