CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #10

[Texas Red]

After listening to the testimony you just posted it sounds like his response is possibly, when ask it he used the hammer. From his demeanor I would say he doesn't have a specific recollection of the event and is just passively going along with the narrative.

OT, thank you, I'll check it out in the settings.

 

[smr]

Thank you so somebody did delete messages as messages left between the 4th and 16th are missing and they did find 25 voicemail messages but some of them were from the media after the family were reported missing. So that indicates messages were wiped at some stage.

Interestingly, the neighbor's security camera also stopped capturing footage between Feb. 5 and Feb. 14.

 

[citygirl]

Yes. I imagine he is in either protective custody, or in what we call "Administration Segregation," for those who need "extra" security because of their crime(s).

So he sees a limited amount of people. Only those in cells he passes by? They escort him to the shower and no one else is in there? He eats alone. When he goes out for air he's all alone? I would be jumping out of my skin. I posted earlier. Lousy coffee, lousy food, no smoking and no wine. Just shoot me.

 

[citygirl]

Thank you so somebody did delete messages as messages left between the 4th and 16th are missing and they did find 25 voicemail messages but some of them were from the media after the family were reported missing. So that indicates messages were wiped at some stage.

It's simply uncanny. Plus, the neighbor's cameras were on the fritz for a similar amount of time. How lucky can you get? It's so tragic that they were assumed to be missing for so long.

 

[MichaelCorleone]

Interestingly, the neighbor's security camera also stopped capturing footage between Feb. 5 and Feb. 14.

And you think this was intentional?

 

[asyousay]

That appears to be the case. IMO

So my assumption is then this is somebody who knew how to access Joeys phone when switched off.

A stranger for example would not know the password to listen to Joey’s voicemail message and then delete them!!

 

[citygirl]

I remember it being present and McCargar, testifying he used it to close the lids on the paint cans.

OT, I was wondering how are you able to post comments when the green triangle in the upper left corner of your moniker is turned off indicating you’re not online?

Never even noticed the green triangle. Who knew?

 

[citygirl]

Could be. If anyone else recalls, please speak up haha it will drive me nuts now!

I didn't think it was confirmed where the sledgehammer was from, some have speculated that it could have been something in CM's truck. It makes sense that it was in the home because of the renovations they were doing, I just don't know if we have "proof" of that or if anyone has indicated actually seeing that hammer.

My recollection is that nothing much was said about the hammer? It was in the grave, a pic that showed some small stains on the side of it, and no mention of blood or dna.
I don't think it's a red herring and do believe it was the murder weapon based on their injuries. What little we could ascertain from their remains.

 

[smr]

And you think this was intentional?

It's intriguing.

 

[dlkutac]

Listen... I have said they have implied it, I don't think I said it's "proof". I have actually even shown where in the testimony the "theory" is coming from. When watching the testimony, listening to the questions and answers and even the questions that are objected to, I can see where the defense is going with it or what they are implying, this is what JMarsh has been saying and I was coming to their defense because I'm tired of people asking him/her if they are related and/or part of the defense team because some disagree. I can also see what they are implying based off of what I've heard... I'm not related, and I definitely don't work for the defense, I live in friggen Canada haha If you are watching everything, putting together the defenses theory of what took place is easy. When they present their case, we will see what they can and cannot prove. IMO

The calls were not recorded, and unless they have text messages or emails or something in writing indicating that it's possible this is what they were doing (financially), I doubt they will be able to prove it. But there a lot of things that there is no proof of in this case, wouldn't you agree?

There is no proof that Chase was getting fired that day, there is no proof that Joey "just found out" about the Feb 2nd cheque, there is no proof he called the bank to ask about said cheque.... I could go on, but I won't. It doesn't stop the prosecution or anyone from using that "theory".

All JMO

It's amazing how the word "proof" is tossed around like it functions as immediate dismissal of any possible reconstruction of events based on circumstantial evidence. When the jury retires to the jury room, they are going to have to review all the circumstantial evidence presented and then speculate how it all ties together. Yes, I said speculate. If they feel the resulting "big picture" extrapolated from circumstantial evidence demonstrates his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, he will be convicted.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

you didn't quote my reply which was that his gambling and stealing/defrauding is evidence of his not staying within boundaries

Hi there LadyL!

OT:
I hope you, and all of our faithful posters on this forum are having a great weekend. It's full sunshine here, and in the high 70s. Just beautiful. In fact I was just out planting some new flowers today for our gazebo flower boxes. Lol!

Anywho.....

Lol! I guess we could stretch it, and say the old two time ex felon, conman, jail inmate, and accused murderer x 4, stayed within some imaginary criminal boundaries only known to criminals like him. Lol!

I believe all of the compelling CE facts that have been entered thus far.

Those AREN'T assumptions on my part of course, but taken from recorded actual facts entered into evidence. The same compelling CE facts the jury will consider.

So as JMarsh says...read the search warrants, and I say look at all the trial evidence via testimony. It's all there. Lol!

Seriously though, as you already know, they dont allow assumptions in trials, but only allow either direct evidence or CE facts. Assumptions, like CM was gambling on the 4th aren't allowed without a supporting basis..

They will allow evidence of an iron clad alibi though. Still waiting for years to see that one. Lol This one is chocked full of CE including lack of alibi, imo.

Imo, no one else had the MEANS, MOTIVE, or OPPORTUNITY, other than CM.

The defense hasn't moved that needle one inch either...not with the QB evidence or CMs phone data evidence, imo. All of it points to him being the one, and no one else. Its stuck like glue.

If others do not wish to consider all of these compelling CE facts, then so be it. That's their choice to make, and everyone has the same choice whether to believe the evidence entered or choose to ignore it.

We all are keeping up with the trial. There has been a multitude of posts already about the evidence that's been entered, and many links have already been graciously provided for all of the trial evidence/testimony.

But I DO believe the trial facts (evidence) which has been entered. ALL of the evidence against CM submitted thus far by the state, with even more to come.

Those ARE facts, and not assumptions by any means, no doubt about it, just like they are in all murder cases. Very few cases are entirely direct evidence cases, and are much more often CE cases, just like this one.

I believe justice will prevail for the McStay family. It's not a complex case for the jury to follow.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and leaves a trail of duck feathers then the jury will know it's a duck. Lol!

It just needs good common sense, and logic applied to all of the circumstantial evidence, which I fully believe these juries will do when they render their verdict.

It's called 'evidence' for a legal reason, because that is exactly what all of it is. Lol!

And very powerful evidence per USSC.

Imo

 

[missy1974]

So he sees a limited amount of people. Only those in cells he passes by? They escort him to the shower and no one else is in there? He eats alone. When he goes out for air he's all alone? I would be jumping out of my skin. I posted earlier. Lousy coffee, lousy food, no smoking and no wine. Just shoot me.

I agree

 

[Mony Mony]

Every time the word alibi is mentioned, I think of the cheer: U.G.L.Y you ain't got no alibi.

Childish, I know. But it makes me giggle. CM ain't got no alibi.

 

[citygirl]

Every time the word alibi is mentioned, I think of the cheer: U.G.L.Y you ain't got no alibi.

Childish, I know. But it makes me giggle. CM ain't got no alibi.

OMG!!!! One of my all time faves. Wildcats. The bestest.

ETA. A little levity goes a long way.

OT. I need to suppress my sense of humor but it is right up there with the country music song "You are the reason our kids are ugly". LMAO.

 

[dlkutac]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

I can tell you this, if I was on the jury the verdict would either be Not Guilty or No Verdict (hung jury). I think it's highly likely that on this jury there are others that think the same.

Sad to say I agree with you. I also predict a hung jury. There are probably jurors who are heavily influenced by the fact Chase was arrested, as well as having authority figures testify against him - the inherent bias in the system. But there may several who simply do not see the evidence to convict. This is particularly sad since we've only seen the prosecution's case so far. At this point, going into the defense presentation, I would've hoped to have seen a slam dunk or two. I feel for the jurors who are going to have to make a determination based on what has been presented, then live with it - either way.

 

[missy1974]

It's amazing how the word "proof" is tossed around like it functions as immediate dismissal of any possible reconstruction of events based on circumstantial evidence. When the jury retires to the jury room, they are going to have to review all the circumstantial evidence presented and then speculate how it all ties together. Yes, I said speculate. If they feel the resulting "big picture" extrapolated from circumstantial evidence demonstrates his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, he will be convicted.

I agree with this. But if the defense also presents circumstantial evidence suggesting something else, should that not be looked at as well?

I am looking forward to what the defense does, partially to see if they can back up what they have been implying, and partially because I want to see what the prosecution can do on cross. IMO, I sometimes learn more on cross exam than I do on direct, on direct, they try to present only what they want you to hear, on cross, they show all the stuff they didn't want you to hear lol It will work both ways, so when we see the defense witnesses, I want to see what the pro's can do. I'm also expecting to see more of the financials, and I think it may help to piece it together.... or not

 

[smr]

Thank you so somebody did delete messages as messages left between the 4th and 16th are missing and they did find 25 voicemail messages but some of them were from the media after the family were reported missing. So that indicates messages were wiped at some stage.

Interestingly, the neighbor's security camera also stopped capturing footage between Feb. 5 and Feb. 14.

Timeline copied from Timeline: McStay Family Slayings

Feb. 4, 2010 - Joseph McStay stopped answering his cell phone, according to his brother. Summer McStay last spoke with her sister. Summer and Joseph text each other around 5 p.m.

Feb. 4, 2010, 7:47 p.m. - Surveillance camera at a neighbor's home shows family's Isuzu trooper leaving the cul de sac. Camera does not show who is in the vehicle.

Feb. 4, 2010, 8:28 p.m. - Fallbrook cellphone tower pings Joseph's phone. He makes a call to an employee in Rancho Cucamonga to talk about work.

Feb. 8, 2010 – Family's 1996 Isuzu Trooper towed from a parking lot near San Ysidro, Calif. Security guards later tell investigators that it may have been parked there sometime between 5:30 p.m. and 7 p.m.

Feb. 10, 2010 - San Diego County sheriffs deputies conduct a welfare check on the McStay home. No signs of foul play, deputies do not go inside.

Feb. 13, 2010 - Mike McStay (Joseph's Brother) crawls inside an open window, searching for family. Finds family dogs had not been fed and food was left on the counter in the kitchen.

Feb. 15, 2010- Family members report the family missing to San Diego County sheriff's deputies.

Feb. 19, 2010 – Homicide investigators search the family's home on Avocado Vista Lane in Fallbrook, Calif. They say there was no sign of struggle.
​

Seems like that time period was between the date when the family went missing and the date when relatives reported them as missing.

 

[missy1974]

Sad to say I agree with you. I also predict a hung jury. There are probably jurors who are heavily influenced by the fact Chase was arrested, as well as having authority figures testify against him - the inherent bias in the system. But there may several who simply do not see the evidence to convict. This is particularly sad since we've only seen the prosecution's case so far. At this point, going into the defense presentation, I would've hoped to have seen a slam dunk or two. I feel for the jurors who are going to have to make a determination based on what has been presented, then live with it - either way.

Maybe they will surprise us! In this case, so far, the gambler in me would never ever bet on a specific outcome .... not yet.

 

[MsFacetious]

I am at my dads office and quickbooks just froze on him.
I'm still 12 pages behind but just felt the need to share.

 

[dlkutac]

I agree with this. But if the defense also presents circumstantial evidence suggesting something else, should that not be looked at as well?

I am looking forward to what the defense does, partially to see if they can back up what they have been implying, and partially because I want to see what the prosecution can do on cross. IMO, I sometimes learn more on cross exam than I do on direct, on direct, they try to present only what they want you to hear, on cross, they show all the stuff they didn't want you to hear lol It will work both ways, so when we see the defense witnesses, I want to see what the pro's can do. I'm also expecting to see more of the financials, and I think it may help to piece it together.... or not

Most definitely!