GUILTY AR - Beverly Carter, 49, Little Rock, 25 Sep 2014 - # 8

[Midge Montana]

Coming in kinda late on this and it may have already been addressed. That said, I'm not exactly sure how it all works, but my aforementioned in and out of jail for decades druggie brother has quite the long page of offenses listed on the same site, and many of the older offenses also have the "1950" date. It has something to do with the ones so old that they were pre-computerized records? Or something like that....it's very common if you look through the records of different people. Especially the long-time repeat offenders.

It's not a typo, but something to do with the age of the record.

Thanks to those 'in the know' to clarifying that. So it isn't an error after all, just a standard way of doing things in the legal sector that most of us are unfamiliar with.

 

[jstkiddn]

It says date filed was in 1950? Arron Lewis was not even born yet in 1950. Crap I would bet most of the posters were not born yet in 1950. Seems like mistakes to me. I saw where mistakes were made on that custody paperwork. Mistakes I knew were mistakes. I know that things were not filed in this case in 1950. The way his detainment paperwork reads he is due out on 7/1/13. Sorry that things like this bother me but too many people take these things as FACT and argue them. Just pointing out what I've been pointing out all along.

Right. My brother wasn't born yet in 1950 either. It's just a standard date they have used for all records that are older than a certain date, but what that magic date is...I do not know. I've seen the same 1/1/1950 date used for many different people.

 

[machiado]

Thank you! I feel like a screaming cat most days!

As a recent websleuths user myself, I don't know many of these abbreviations either. Here is a handy link: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ns-and-Acronyms-LIST-ONLY-NO-DISCUSSION/page3

 

[nojusticenusa]

Coming in kinda late on this and it may have already been addressed. That said, I'm not exactly sure how it all works, but my aforementioned in and out of jail for decades druggie brother has quite the long page of offenses listed on the same site, and many of the older offenses also have the "1950" date. It has something to do with the ones so old that they were pre-computerized records? Or something like that....it's very common if you look through the records of different people. Especially the long-time repeat offenders.

It's not a typo, but something to do with the age of the record.

But this is on records that were just filed in December 2014 on the new charges!

 

[nojusticenusa]

Right. My brother wasn't born yet in 1950 either. It's just a standard date they have used for all records that are older than a certain date, but what that magic date is...I do not know. I've seen the same 1/1/1950 date used for many different people.

But we are not talking about older records. We are talking about things filed recently as in THIS MONTH!!!!! But hey I'm dumber than a box of rocks so what do I know?

 

[hagger]

Neither the AOC, nor the courts providing the information, guarantee or warrant the correctness, completeness, currency or utility for any general or specific purpose of the data made available through the access of this site.

https://caseinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/docs/disclaim.htm

ETA: not for official use and is provided as a public service

 

[jstkiddn]

But we are not talking about older records. We are talking about things filed recently as in THIS MONTH!!!!! But hey I'm dumber than a box of rocks so what do I know?

I have always assumed it was something with older records because in my brother's case, it seems that's where it showed that way....but I don't know that to be for sure. That said, I've seen it too many times (with other people as well) to think it's a simple typo. It has to be some sort of default date or something and whatever the reason, it is far from unique to this case. Same exact date is on many, many other records.

 

[hagger]

NJ,
the following link explains a lot of things about that website- maybe you will find the answer you seek...

https://caseinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/docs/help20141013.htm

 

[jstkiddn]

I just went and looked at one of my brother's that shows to 1950 date and it says:

Case Description

Case ID: (redacted for privacy) - ORDER IMAGES FOR BOOK# (redacted) PAGE# (redacted)
Filing Date: Sunday , January 01st, 1950
Court: 26 - GARLAND
Location: CI - CIRCUIT
Type: ZH - OLD CASES INDEX
Status: none
Images:

I bolded the "old cases index". So I'm guessing in at least some instances the date is due to old cases. Which one specifically are we talking about for AL where it says this? I'd like to look at it.

 

[hockeymom4]

I have always assumed it was something with older records because in my brother's case, it seems that's where it showed that way....but I don't know that to be for sure. That said, I've seen it too many times (with other people as well) to think it's a simple typo. It has to be some sort of default date or something and whatever the reason, it is far from unique to this case. Same exact date is on many, many other records.

If a handful of us have seen it, off and on WS, it certainly can not be a typo. Not to mention, it is happening in different jurisdictions. You got that right.

 

[jstkiddn]

Regarding P.E./T.E. dates, I found the following via Google. Bolding by me:

When your in prison what exactly does your pe/te date mean?
Not legal advice: PE/TE date means the sentence length, offense, minimum required time to be served before transfer/parole eligibility, jail time credit, class status, & release dates.

PE stands for 'Parole Eligible' while TE stands for 'Transfer Eligible'.

Transfer Eligible (TE) is for the transfer of inmates, who have committed certain crimes, to 'parole' status. They are assigned with a 'transfer eligibility (TE) date.'

“Parole” is the release of an inmate into the community prior to the expiration of the sentence, subject to conditions imposed by the Board and to supervision. Supervision is accomplished on behalf of the Board by Parole/Probation Officers, also referred to as “supervision officers”

 

[nojusticenusa]

Neither the AOC, nor the courts providing the information, guarantee or warrant the correctness, completeness, currency or utility for any general or specific purpose of the data made available through the access of this site.

https://caseinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/docs/disclaim.htm

ETA: not for official use and is provided as a public service

Ha Ha well that's good to know.

 

[jstkiddn]

Okay...I think I've caught up now.

This is just my own personal opinion, so take it for what it's worth.

As far as I know, none of us posting in this thread work within the judicial system, so we are all having to learn as we go along and sometimes we have to make some assumptions.

That said, I personally don't think there is anything sloppy, nefarious or otherwise out of line going on with this case just because we don't know the reason behind a few dates. I don't think the dates are wrong, per se. I think there is a reason that we as "civilians" don't know since we aren't privy to the day to day paperwork that goes on within the justice system. I'm sure a lawyer could take one look at this stuff and give a very reasonable explanation.

The 1950 date....seen it way too many times and it does not cause me a second of pause.

The T.E. date of 2013? To me it's pretty plain that was the "transfer eligibility date" from theft of property conviction in Benton and Washington Counties back in 2011. I personally don't think that is all that strange to see that date being used since in addition to being held for murder charges, he has ALSO had a parole violation against that exact sentencing...which is why he's in prison instead of in county lockup awaiting trial.

I'm no legal genius and this is all my opinion only.

 

[nojusticenusa]

Okay...I think I've caught up now.

This is just my own personal opinion, so take it for what it's worth.

As far as I know, none of us posting in this thread work within the judicial system, so we are all having to learn as we go along and sometimes we have to make some assumptions.

That said, I personally don't think there is anything sloppy, nefarious or otherwise out of line going on with this case just because we don't know the reason behind a few dates. I don't think the dates are wrong, per se. I think there is a reason that we as "civilians" don't know since we aren't privy to the day to day paperwork that goes on within the justice system. I'm sure a lawyer could take one look at this stuff and give a very reasonable explanation.

The 1950 date....seen it way too many times and it does not cause me a second of pause.

The T.E. date of 2013? To me it's pretty plain that was the "transfer eligibility date" from theft of property conviction in Benton and Washington Counties back in 2011. I personally don't think that is all that strange to see that date being used since in addition to being held for murder charges, he has ALSO had a parole violation against that exact sentencing...which is why he's in prison instead of in county lockup awaiting trial.

I'm no legal genius and this is all my opinion only.

I don't think anyone, well let me speak for myself, I know I wasn't saying there was anything nefarious or otherwise out of line going on with the case. What I was commenting on and stand behind my previous comments is that documents filed with the court in December 2014 have a 1950 filing date. I have not seen any explanation for this that makes me think it is anything else but just sloppy data entry. As a "civilian" I would expect for at least filing dates to be correct in the court system. I do however understand about the explanation given by some on other cases that have old case documents that were before the on line computerized system having a default date of 1950 but something filed recent (as in December 2014) should have correct date of filing on it. JMHO. However I did not remark that this has anything to do with the case itself.

As to the TE date of 2013. On ADOC website it shows this date as AL's release date which as we all know is his prior release date. Just seems they would update that to no release date since he has no release date obviously.

We have seen other incorrect dates and confusing information in CL's custody documents and on line filing dates that obviously confused many here as they argued their points relentlessly. Those of us, me and Butler, who knew what had happened tried to explain that those dates and information was wrong to NO avail. I'm just saying that it would be nice if the court clerk could get things correct so there was not so much confusion.

I do not think however this is nefarious or intentional but data entry mistakes instead. Just seems to cause a lot of confusion IMPO. But again I'm just a dummy so I'm sure I'll get grief for this post too!

 

[NWLady]

Neither the AOC, nor the courts providing the information, guarantee or warrant the correctness, completeness, currency or utility for any general or specific purpose of the data made available through the access of this site.

https://caseinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/docs/disclaim.htm

ETA: not for official use and is provided as a public service

Exactly. Thank you hagger.

 

[NWLady]

NJ,
the following link explains a lot of things about that website- maybe you will find the answer you seek...

https://caseinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/docs/help20141013.htm

Thanks Again, hagger!

Just jumping off your post, there are lots of people who believe they themselves (or others) can find little loop-holes/technicalities in hopes of getting their charges reduced or thrown out. Hence the reason for the disclaimer on the state website (about not for official use etc etc etc)

 

[NWLady]

IMO, the only thing AL's past charges have to do with anything is in regards to his parole/probation revocation(s).

Having current Capital Murder and Kidnapping charge are what IMO is of the utmost importance at this time.

 

[ConnectZDots]

4 weeks from today is AL's birthday. In prison. (1/13/81) He turns 34. I wonder if anyone will bake him a cake.....

 

[concernedmother]

http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2014/12/15/killer-couples
How many accused killer couples do we have here on WS? ?

Just wondering how common this is.
I can think of 2.
Tammy & Sidney
Aaron & Crystal

 

[ConnectZDots]

http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2014/12/15/killer-couples
How many accused killer couples do we have here on WS? ?

Just wondering how common this is.
I can think of 2.
Tammy & Sidney
Aaron & Crystal

Bonnie & Clyde.

Turns out she didn't really resemble Faye Dunaway at all.