Of course. But sometimes things go wrong during that process. Bureaucracy is not pretty or efficient. But not everything bad that happens is malicious or negligent.
www.wthr.com
B Kohlberger was always given new suits to wear by his defense team. The same with Barry Morphew when he was still incarcerated.
My view: It's a chess move - inviting youtubers (involved w/the leaks) as witnesses.
Can you imagine?)
They're hovering in the event of a damaging decision from Judge Gull re: contempt charges (such as removing the D). For the same reasons RA appealed to the SCOIN in November when she removed the D. JMHO
I'd hold neither NMcL nor Ives responsible for maintaining State's evidence for the duration of an investigation. (That role belongs to the LE/investigative team - they are fully responsible for maintaining the State's investigative and physical evidence here.)
My view: It's a chess move - inviting youtubers (involved w/the leaks) as witnesses.
With the bonus of being educational for the Court who may be wondering: "what is a youtuber?" and "what's the practical PR benefit of feeding these youtubers crime scene photos?" (answer: nothing)
Youtubers are not journalists/Press, are not a PR vehicle, have no reliable sources, insignificant social media influence. Rather, they are odd characters playing true crime theory wars on youtube. (UNMODERATED!!
Argument point being: Neither the State or the Defense would find them useful for PR (covert or otherwise).
jmho
Nothing from a source that is TOS approved.
Well if I'm reading the tea leaves correctly, the benefit to leaking the crime scene photos is sticks/branches. And that's because that's the defense's main theory...so far. It wasn't RA, it was...My view: It's a chess move - inviting youtubers (involved w/the leaks) as witnesses.
With the bonus of being educational for the Court who may be wondering: "what is a youtuber?" and "what's the practical PR benefit of feeding these youtubers crime scene photos?" (answer: nothing)
Youtubers are not journalists/Press, are not a PR vehicle, have no reliable sources, insignificant social media influence. Rather, they are odd characters playing true crime theory wars on youtube. (UNMODERATED!!
Argument point being: Neither the State or the Defense would find them useful for PR (covert or otherwise).
jmho
Now I thought that was about procedure. The SC decided unanimously that the Judge had no bias. This right now has nothing to do with what the SC ruled. This is bringing contempt charges for actions still not adjudicated in court, until today (and in the writings submitted soon by both sides) Supremes didn't rule AB & BR did nothing wrong and here's that judgement. That's still to come, whatever it may or may not be. AJMO
4pm news update video
Hearing held to discuss accusations of contempt against Richard Allen's attorneys in Delphi case
Andrew Badwinn and Brad Rozzzi are trying to defend themselves against those contempt allegations. Richard allen is here in court today to hear the testimony.
I would take it a step further - if there is any practical benefit to leaking grisly crime scene photos of dead little girls it is generally to anyone but the defense. I think of the townsfolk with the pitchforks and torches going after the mad scientist in classic horror movies.
So in a nutshell, their defense for their egregious leaks is that the prosecutor and the judge should recuse themselves and the hearing scheduled for this morning should be postponed. And if not, they plan to bring in a clown car full of you-tubers and influencers to set the record straight.
All were denied.
What's happened so far in contempt hearing for Delphi murder suspect's defense attorneys
The Delphi murder suspect's attorneys are defending themselves against charges of contempt of court in a Fort Wayne courtroom Monday.www.jconline.com
Of course she denied all his motions. His motions were essentially asking the judge to step down, and for her to kick the prosecutor to the curb and for her to postpone a hearing which was about to immediately begin, with a courtroom of witnesses already there.FYI for all:
at about 2:20 min in this reporting (that @twall has kindly linked ^^) says a 3rd hearing had begun on the D's motion to dismiss due to the State's withholding of exculpatory evidence...
also that Gull v. Hennessy was greatly contentious with sharp exchanges between Judge Gull and Hennessy, including Gull denying Hennessy (the D) every motion.
I'm guessing
Mr. Snay
missed his 5 minutes
of fame day.
jmho
Whereas months ago they claimed they were ready and willing to do this work pro bono AND they were ready for a speedy trial.
