I believe it's long understood that District Court Judges appointed to preside over a felony cases, let alone an appointed "Special Judge," are responsible to oversee Justice.
That person is completely in charge, completely the gatekeeper for justice for not only the defense but for
both parties, in a system where the prosecution represents "the People" including the victims.
And I believe we're all here for Justice for Abby and Libby.
Understandably, the murder of these two young victims also conjures up a lot of emotion. In my experience, emotion can often come with the public wanting-- even demanding, things that sometimes come without any regard to the Statute and/ or ignore the discretion given to the Court.
That said, while I personally think Judge Gull could probably do a better job explaining some of her controversial decisions-- while also educating the public, I can't say I've disagreed with these decisions.
For example, defense lawyers love to call upon the claim that their clients civil rights are being violated whenever they can't sell alternate facts (i.e., a misrepresentation of the facts).
I think we saw this already last October after RA's defense attorneys, amongst other things, issued a press release on behalf of RA, accidentally emailing a discovery log to a third party, made “improper” statements in Motions filed with the Court, and ultimately allowed a photograph from sealed evidence to be leaked to a YT crime host. IMO, Judge Gull had seen enough when she finally addressed RA directly in Court:
“I have great concerns with your representation,” Gull said to Allen during the hearing. “I cannot and will not allow them to represent you. I am sorry this happened to you Mr. Allen.”
IMO, Judge Gall's actions to remove RA's defense team and replace them with two new defenders was clearly in the interest of Justice. A decision not made in a vacuum, and certainly not intended to punish the defendant.
In response, the former defense team wasted no time claiming RA's civil rights were being violated--an action I believe intended to deflect from their own negligence.
In January 2024, RA's defense attorneys were allowed reinstated by a majority decision of the higher Court, however, the Court unanimously denied their request to remove Judge Gull from the case.
In the latest decision by the Court to bar RA from using a third party defense, including making claims in court that the murders were tied to an Odinistic sacrifice, or other alleged suspects, this was denied because after the defense was given 3 days to provide the Nexus, they failed to show some sort of connection between this theory and the actual crime.
Using reason, it follows that there’s good reason the legal threshold is so high for a third party defense.
In other words, what you’re essentially doing is accusing other people of the murder and labeling them as child murderers. Defense attorneys just can't go into Court and say, 'Uh, maybe big foot did it.' Whether or not the defendant likes these guys and thinks this is a clever strategy, allowing it is not in the interest of justice!
Today, it seems to me that instead of looking at their failure here, they've again turned to the table of deflection, and have instead labeled Judge Gall as unfair, biased, or not impartial, for allowing RA's confessions to be admitted at trial while dismissing the SODDI defense. IMO, as a matter of law, the two decisions are not comparable.
Incidentally, the religion that worships Norse and Germanic gods, particularly the chief god Odin, was first brought to court in September 2023, where RA's attorneys filed Motions stating that Odinists killed Abby and Libby. Here, the defense also alleged the prison guards should be viewed as suspects because they were alleged to be Odinists!
You can't make this up. Such repetitive Motions by the Defense that lacked any factual basis has been a complete waste of resources. IMO, I don't think it was any wonder when Judge Gall soon after removed these attorneys from defending RA.
To RA, I say -- be careful what you ask for. MOO
Accused Delphi killer Richard Allen is seeking the removal and replacement of the judge in his case as well as the reinstatement of his defense attorneys.
lawandcrime.com
when you rack the slide, one bullet ejects, and then another is chambered. So, 10 rounds, rack slide, 9 left in mag. and one in chamber, ready to go, then at CS, rack slide, one round pops out on to the ground, another chambers in the gun, leaving 8 in the magazine.
