CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #18

[Mony Mony]

The prosecution has so far in almost 4 months hardly put out any "irrefutable" evidence of Chase's guilt.

IMO, the backdated checks and the posing as JM to erase QB is irrefutable proof of CMs guilt. The phone pings at the graves, his DNA on the gearshift, the faro scan are just icing on the cake. IMO. Oh, and CMs lack of credible alibi on the 4th. The way CM "envisions" that evening, he was home with CJ.

IMO MOO etc at

 

[la2cabo]

IMO, the backdated checks and the posing as JM to erase QB is irrefutable proof of CMs guilt. The phone pings at the graves, his DNA on the gearshift, the faro scan are just icing on the cake. IMO. Oh, and CMs lack of credible alibi on the 4th. The way CM "envisions" that evening, he was home with CJ.

IMO MOO etc at

The defense needs to abandon their SODKDI theory. It's making them look worse and worse with each witness they put on the stand. They are, however, helping the state put the nails in Merritt's coffin.

 

[missy1974]

Anybody venture to guess what is on the agenda for tomorrow? Is Bachman still on? I hope the prosecution puts out irrefutable evidence of DKs alibi.

Bachman was still on direct IIRC, then I'm not sure who else other than Dr. Rudin... I thought they were bringing Steers back?

I hope McGee is back lol less uhmm ahhh hmmm'ing

I hope the prosecution does that as well...

 

[Karinna]

The defense needs to abandon their SODKDI theory. It's making them look worse and worse with each witness they put on the stand. They are, however, helping the state put the nails in Merritt's coffin.

Agree, and i think the rot started for the DT when they put CJ on the stand. I think MR made it obvious that the witness was lying, IMO.

 

[QueenBofOB]

Agree, and i think the rot started for the DT when they put CJ on the stand. I think MR made it obvious that the witness was lying, IMO.

That, plus his sister's shady story.

 

[Force Ten]

That, plus his sister's shady story.

Yes. Chase told Hanke he was NOT in the area on Feb 6th.

ETA: For Chase to been up there driving his brother around doing errands is absurd. It's 4 minutes away from where Chase lived and there were other people within their circle who could've drove Miss Daisy.

 

[smr]

Would you kindly insert "IMO" if stating an opinion or placing a link in your post if it is fact, Thank you.

Those 3 letter words have long lost their meanings around here. Lol.

 

[Force Ten]

One thing that sustains credibility to the family killed in the home is the painters tape found in the grave. It's a ridiculous notion that the tape was used to bound Summer, especially considering the tape was not found on her.

 

[Karinna]

That, plus his sister's shady story.

Yes, definitely, i'm sure that was all a WTF moment for the jury.

 

[katydid23]

Those 3 letter words have long lost their meanings around here. Lol.

Not really, not IMO. JMO

 

[katydid23]

Bachman was still on direct IIRC, then I'm not sure who else other than Dr. Rudin... I thought they were bringing Steers back?

I hope McGee is back lol less uhmm ahhh hmmm'ing

I hope the prosecution does that as well...

I think they are also planning to play long, long portions of CM's interview with the detectives?

 

[mrjitty]

I thought i posted about this but must have got distracted

At the end of testimony from Forensic dude there is a fascinating sidebar about admissibility of some taped testimony.

I understood the debate to be as follows *

(* please not I am not a US law expert and have not worked in law since the 90s!!)

As I understood it, the State already introduced some Chase taped statements from Police interviews. e.g some of the 2010 interviews were played to the Court. This does not mean all tapes are admissible. For example, both sides appear to accept discussion of the lie detector test is not admissible.

The defence wish to play large sections of testimony from different interviews separated in time. So my guess is they mean to play not only 2010 interviews, but interviews after Chase's arrest in 2014.

Both the state and the Judge appear to accept that other sections of the 2010 interviews are admissible where they relate to the same question and issue.

So for example if Chase was answering a question in 2010 that the state played in evidence - the defence can play a different section of the same interview where Chase clarified his answer or addressed the same issue.

The defence appeared to be arguing that where Chase addressed the same issue, separated in time, (i.e, years later) then the subsequent answer is now admissible.

So this would mean if he gave an improved or different explanation in 2014 - the defence wants that to come in.

State argued that the admissibility only extends to answers in the same interview and the judge appeared to agree. However the judge invited the defence to submit authorities for their argument.

We don't know the result of that side bar.

My uneducated guess is that the defence want to use the arrest interviews to introduce Chase's version. And I guess this all has something to do with the 2010 interview being as a witness in the investigation whereas the 2014 interview is as a suspect.

 

[Tortoise]

One thing that sustains credibility to the family killed in the home is the painters tape found in the grave. It's a ridiculous notion that the tape was used to bound Summer, especially considering the tape was not found on her.

Also the baby's towel, and the paint on Summer's bra with drips that dried horizontally, showing she laid on her side long enough for the paint to dry without moving which would cause the paint drips to move in other directions. The stuff their crime scene specialist ignored basically.

Joseph being killed with the rest of the family because Joey Jr was in the grave with him, and also his attire and no shoes, and the nexus of his phone pings only at Fallbrook, the timing of the cheque at the house, and the non-McStay vehicle leaving and then braking.

IMO

 

[asyousay]

I still don’t believe the family were murdered in the home. I just can not fathom Chase being that good at cleaning up a crime scene and leaving no evidence behind.

I still think logically Joey taken out earlier that afternoon and Chase goes to the home and gets Summer and the kids out of the home.

I don’t believe for a second they had lunch together so the fact that Chase maintains they did makes me wonder why he would lie about it. So Chase was up to something at that stage probably putting his plan into action.

IMO

 

[Tortoise]

I thought i posted about this but must have got distracted

At the end of testimony from Forensic dude there is a fascinating sidebar about admissibility of some taped testimony.

I understood the debate to be as follows *

(* please not I am not a US law expert and have not worked in law since the 90s!!)

As I understood it, the State already introduced some Chase taped statements from Police interviews. e.g some of the 2010 interviews were played to the Court. This does not mean all tapes are admissible. For example, both sides appear to accept discussion of the lie detector test is not admissible.

The defence wish to play large sections of testimony from different interviews separated in time. So my guess is they mean to play not only 2010 interviews, but interviews after Chase's arrest in 2014.

Both the state and the Judge appear to accept that other sections of the 2010 interviews are admissible where they relate to the same question and issue.

So for example if Chase was answering a question in 2010 that the state played in evidence - the defence can play a different section of the same interview where Chase clarified his answer or addressed the same issue.

The defence appeared to be arguing that where Chase addressed the same issue, separated in time, (i.e, years later) then the subsequent answer is now admissible.

So this would mean if he gave an improved or different explanation in 2014 - the defence wants that to come in.

State argued that the admissibility only extends to answers in the same interview and the judge appeared to agree. However the judge invited the defence to submit authorities for their argument.

We don't know the result of that side bar.

My uneducated guess is that the defence want to use the arrest interviews to introduce Chase's version. And I guess this all has something to do with the 2010 interview being as a witness in the investigation whereas the 2014 interview is as a suspect.

The State only played the section of the 2014 interrogation pertaining to his whereabouts on the 6th.

Judge was mistaken in that he thought they'd played sections pertaining to the 4th and the 6th.

I think that might be where the State's issue lies, but I could be wrong. My guess is the defence wants to bring in the whole of 2014 tape because otherwise the trial ends without an 'official' word from Merritt about his whereabouts on the 4th. All there is from him about the 4th is the 2019 jailhouse tape.

I'm confused about what they were discussing with the judge about conversations brought in allowing them to do this, maybe it is that the State brought in the conversation through the glass?

IMO

 

[Tortoise]

I still don’t believe the family were murdered in the home. I just can not fathom Chase being that good at cleaning up a crime scene and leaving no evidence behind.

I still think logically Joey taken out earlier that afternoon and Chase goes to the home and gets Summer and the kids out of the home.

I don’t believe for a second they had lunch together so the fact that Chase maintains they did makes me wonder why he would lie about it. So Chase was up to something at that stage probably putting his plan into action.

IMO

Maybe I should start a poll about the location of the murders.

I haven't set up a poll before so I'm not sure how to do it but I'll have a go.

I'll try and gather some input on what options to include -

All four killed in the house
All four killed elsewhere
Summer and children killed at house and Joey killed elsewhere
Joey killed at house and Summer and children killed elsewhere

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

 

[Tortoise]

I also think he left that black light there.

IMO

 

[mrjitty]

The State only played the section of the 2014 interrogation pertaining to his whereabouts on the 6th.

Judge was mistaken in that he thought they'd played sections pertaining to the 4th and the 6th.

I think that might be where the State's issue lies, but I could be wrong. My guess is the defence wants to bring in the whole of 2014 tape because otherwise the trial ends without an 'official' word from Merritt about his whereabouts on the 4th. All there is from him about the 4th is the 2019 jailhouse tape.

I'm confused about what they were discussing with the judge about conversations brought in allowing them to do this, maybe it is that the State brought in the conversation through the glass?

IMO

Thanks - i did not know any of 2014 was admitted.

My understanding of the technical argument is that if you play parts of an interview dealing with a specific question or issue, then other parts of the same interview dealing with the same topic come in.

The defence appeared to try to argue that because the issues were covered in the 2010 interview the 2014 answers came in.

The Judge said that wasn't his understanding but invited the defence to submit authorities.

But as the specific statute etc was mentioned its hard for me to find exactly what the starting situation is!

 

[Tortoise]

Thanks - i did not know any of 2014 was admitted.

My understanding of the technical argument is that if you play parts of an interview dealing with a specific question or issue, then other parts of the same interview dealing with the same topic come in.

The defence appeared to try to argue that because the issues were covered in the 2010 interview the 2014 answers came in.

The Judge said that wasn't his understanding but invited the defence to submit authorities.

But as the specific statute etc was mentioned its hard for me to find exactly what the starting situation is!

I could be wrong but I think the 6th came in because of Juanita's testimony.

I'm not sure if there was a 2010 interview? Do you mean the informal interview on Feb 17th with DuGal? Because he didn't discuss where he was on the 6th or the night of the 4th in that interview. They only asked him about the 8th based on recovering the Trooper that night.

 

[Niner]

Tuesday, May 7th:
*Trial continues (Day 50) (@ 9am PT) - CA - McStay Family: Joseph (40), Summer (43), Gianni (4) & Joey Jr (3) (Feb. 4, 2010, Fallbrook; found Nov. 11, 2013) - *Charles "Chase" Ray Merritt aka Charles Ray Mandel aka Charles Ray Morritt aka Chase Meredith (57/now 60) arrested (11/5/14) & indicted (11/7/14) of 4 counts of murder with special circumstance; plead not guilty. DP case.
Trial started 1/7/19. Dark on all Fridays. 7 women & 4 men & 1 ? (alternates include 4 men & 2 women-minus one).
Trial Days (1-47: 1/7/19 thru 4/30/19) reference post #492 here:
CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #18
5/1/19 Day 48: Defense witnesses: Dennis Shogren, defense financial accountant. Sgt Joseph Steers, re: the Mitchley awning. Detective Daniel Hanke, re: the paintball documentation. Trial continues on 5/2.
5/2/19 Day 49: Defense witnesses: Sgt. Daniel Hanke (re visit to San Ysidro). Sgt. Gary Hart (re home phones) & Sgt. Edward Bachman (re FARO scan & DK's alibi). Had only morning session. Trial continues on Tuesday, 5/7.
Tentative Schedule for week of May 6th thru May 10th: May 6th (Monday)-NO court-Judge not available. Court with jurors on May 7th (Tuesday), May 8th (Wednesday)-Defense expected to rest. May 9th (Thursday)-NO court (for a juror). Dark on May 10th (Friday).
Tentative Scheduled for week of May 13th thru May 17th: Closing arguments now expected the week of May 13th.