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

[Tortoise]

Wednesday, May 8th:
*Trial continues (Day 51) (@ 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 62) 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 included 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.
5/7/19 Day 50: Defense witness: Det. Edward Bachman Lead Investigator San Bernardino (asked about his investigation to verify Lavanaugh's alibi). Jury goes to early lunch. Before the jury was sent to lunch the judge addressed a request made by "several jurors" to see Merritt's truck in person. The judge is arranging for them to see it. Judge the defense and judge are in chambers with the court reporter. Maline asked the judge for an ex parte hearing & motioned that it may have something to do with McGee. Defense is asking for a continuance due to attorney McGee's "condition". Judge says as far as the rest of the evidence if McGee & his doctor think he can continue next week then they will, if not they may have to talk about a continuance depending on predicted length of time. Defense witness: Dugal. Trial continues on 5/8.
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.



Do I have the correct witnesses for yesterday? I have Bachman & Dugal. TIA!

Yes Bachman and DuGal yesterday.
Plus ex parte hearing for the defense re. McGee.
Plus Judge ruled on the prosecution's objection to defense playing the entire 2014 interrogation tape with redacted polygraph.

 

[Tortoise]

Today, if it goes according to plan,

the jury will inspect Merritt's truck.
I think Bachman will be recalled for the playing of parts of the redacted 2014 interrogation tape related to February 4th and 6th, plus any cross-examination.
Witness Gary Robertson, defense investigator, ex-homicide detective, will testify.

Jury will be told that court will be dark next week - Mon May 13th to Weds 15th.
Two jurors off on cruise Thurs May 16th and Mon 20th.
Week starting Tues May 21st possibly Dr Rudin unless McGee can do it before.

 

[Tortoise]

So I'm trying to understand what happened. The Judge thought Merritt might claim ineffective assistance of counsel if he ordered Maline to examine Dr Rudin?

Even though Maline examined their own expert Gregg Stutchman on the same subject matter. And also examined the LE officials who did the porch/road/truck measurements.

Even though they've had numerous dark days for Maline to prepare and consult with McGee's notes or in person.
Even though Daugherty could step into Imes shoes and do it next week.
Even though they might lose jurors/the jury.

Sounds to me like the defense is not happy that their expert Stutchman did anything to counter Liscio, the state's expert.

Or did he, the Judge, allow the farcical delays to continue because he thought Maline couldn't then proceed to handle closing arguments without McGee?

 

[Niner]

Yes Bachman and DuGal yesterday.
Plus ex parte hearing for the defense re. McGee.
Plus Judge ruled on the prosecution's objection to defense playing the entire 2014 interrogation tape with redacted polygraph.

And his ruling was? Granted? or Denied? TIA!
Oh - from your next post - so it was granted since Bachman will be testifying on it, correct?

and Thanks for helping keep my notes straight!

 

[Tortoise]

And his ruling was? Granted? or Denied? TIA!
Oh - from your next post - so it was granted since Bachman will be testifying on it, correct?

and Thanks for helping keep my notes straight!

Yes he allowed in certain portions.

 

[Tortoise]

I agree as to the 6th. I don't think the 4th should be allowed, but I guess the state will be able to point out differences

Well if I understood it correctly, it stems from the portion the State played, where they said to Merritt so if your truck was seen in Fallbrook on the 4th and then your phone puts you at the grave site on the 6th, and he only responded regarding the 6th.

But if during the same interrogation he did respond to the 4th, by saying he didn't think he went there on the 4th, if the Judge didn't allow that in I think it would give grounds for appeal. Otherwise the jury is under the impression he never responded.

IMO the defense were playing another dirty trick. They weren't prepared (after weeks and weeks of this being tabled) to put the work in to highlight the portions that related to the part the state played. My guess is they were hoping, as the Judge said he should do, that he would rule it all inadmissible, so they could find any grounds for appeal after a conviction. That's why the judge spent hours going through hundreds of pages of the transcript, which as he said, was not his job, but I do think he did it with an eye on the end game.

It's sickening actually to see that they only think they can score a 'victory' by underhanded dirty tricks. Maline keeps his head down while the Judge allows him to play a dirty case. I think it's going to get dirtier, and I expect to hear more lies in their closing arguments, if it ever gets there. Thank goodness the state gets to go twice. If it ever gets there.

JMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Morning all!

I, for one, am not the least bit worried the jury wants to see the death transportation truck belonging to CM.

I'm not worried now, just like I wasn't worried either, when the Scott Peterson jury was taken out, and shown SPs transportation boat he had used to carry Laci, and Conner's dead bodies to the bay. I actually think it helped to seal his fate.

Imo, this jury's wants is not solely to see the outside of his vehicle, but they are going to have images of the 4 victims, and those images will be there as they look at this truck to see if there was room for him to transport them to the desert without detection.

Imo, they will see it was very sufficient to remove the 4 bodies from their home to be transported to the desert to be discarded.

Imo, there are various reasons why each juror wants to see the truck, not just one.

It will make a chilling impact on them knowing the entire family was dead inside of this same vehicle. So it wont be all about matching the truck to the video. Far from it, imo.

Although I've never seen jurors taken to see a vehicle when the vehicle has been modified from it's original condition from when it belonged to the defendant.

I'm sure that will be brought to the attention to the jury by the state again.

I think the DT would like it if the jury thought it is in it's original state, and if they could get away with they would like the jury to believe this is exactly what it looked like originally.

Jmo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

As upset as the prosecution is about this, and other's... the judge pretty much said, if he forces the one lawyer to go on without the sick one, they will ask for a mistrial, and it sounds like he would grant it... so he said, it's either this or it's a mistrial and we do it all over again.

I truly dont understand why it seems to be so taxing for the defense when it's almost over anyway.

Remember in the Joey Arias death penalty trial, which went on, and on? Juan Martinez was the sole prosecutor. The only one who sat at his table was the lead detective.

Yet amazingly he didn't blink an eye, and did it right by himself. Exceptionally well I may add, imo. And that case was moving everyday with many witnesses for the state, and multiple defense witnesses he masterfully cross examined right by himself. He had years to prepare, and so has the CM defense team. Each defense attorney should already know in great detail about their own witnesses.

The difference in them, and Martinez he was fully prepared from the minute he first time stepped into the courtroom for the Arias DP trial.

Imo

 

[la2cabo]

I truly dont understand why it seems to be so taxing for the defense when it's almost over anyway.

Remember in the Joey Arias death penalty trial, which went on, and on? Juan Martinez was the sole prosecutor. The only one who sat at his table was the lead detective.

Yet amazingly he didn't blink an eye, and did it right by himself. Exceptionally well I may add, imo. And that case was moving everyday with many witnesses for the state, and multiple defense witnesses he masterfully cross examined right by himself. He had years to prepare, and so has the CM defense team. Each defense attorney should already know in great detail about their own witnesses.

The difference in them, and Martinez he was fully prepared from the minute he first time stepped into the courtroom for the Arias DP trial.

Imo

It's not easy to be organized when one is making up crap on the fly.

 

[Tortoise]

I'm curious about this witness Gary Robertson.

Opening statement said he may testify, but nothing about his work on the case. He wasn't mentioned by Maline lately as being on their list of final witnesses.

Just a filler?

I wonder who he investigated.

 

[mrjitty]

Well if I understood it correctly, it stems from the portion the State played, where they said to Merritt so if your truck was seen in Fallbrook on the 4th and then your phone puts you at the grave site on the 6th, and he only responded regarding the 6th.

But if during the same interrogation he did respond to the 4th, by saying he didn't think he went there on the 4th, if the Judge didn't allow that in I think it would give grounds for appeal. Otherwise the jury is under the impression he never responded.

IMO the defense were playing another dirty trick. They weren't prepared (after weeks and weeks of this being tabled) to put the work in to highlight the portions that related to the part the state played. My guess is they were hoping, as the Judge said he should do, that he would rule it all inadmissible, so they could find any grounds for appeal after a conviction. That's why the judge spent hours going through hundreds of pages of the transcript, which as he said, was not his job, but I do think he did it with an eye on the end game.

It's sickening actually to see that they only think they can score a 'victory' by underhanded dirty tricks. Maline keeps his head down while the Judge allows him to play a dirty case. I think it's going to get dirtier, and I expect to hear more lies in their closing arguments, if it ever gets there. Thank goodness the state gets to go twice. If it ever gets there.

JMO

This is the part that is baffling to me - why does the Judge allow such tomfoolery?

 

[missy1974]

Each defense attorney should already know in great detail about their own witnesses.

RSBM - I think this is the problem, they do know in great detail their OWN witnesses. That is why Maline would prefer McGee to question Dr. Rudin.

 

[mrjitty]

Well if I understood it correctly, it stems from the portion the State played, where they said to Merritt so if your truck was seen in Fallbrook on the 4th and then your phone puts you at the grave site on the 6th, and he only responded regarding the 6th.

But if during the same interrogation he did respond to the 4th, by saying he didn't think he went there on the 4th, if the Judge didn't allow that in I think it would give grounds for appeal. Otherwise the jury is under the impression he never responded.

IMO the defense were playing another dirty trick. They weren't prepared (after weeks and weeks of this being tabled) to put the work in to highlight the portions that related to the part the state played. My guess is they were hoping, as the Judge said he should do, that he would rule it all inadmissible, so they could find any grounds for appeal after a conviction. That's why the judge spent hours going through hundreds of pages of the transcript, which as he said, was not his job, but I do think he did it with an eye on the end game.

It's sickening actually to see that they only think they can score a 'victory' by underhanded dirty tricks. Maline keeps his head down while the Judge allows him to play a dirty case. I think it's going to get dirtier, and I expect to hear more lies in their closing arguments, if it ever gets there. Thank goodness the state gets to go twice. If it ever gets there.

JMO

I think you are correct about the rest of it.

The idea that the defense was ever going to play 8 hours of tape is simply absurd.

They deliberately didn't indicate what they wanted to include.

 

[la2cabo]

I'm curious about this witness Gary Robertson.

Opening statement said he may testify, but nothing about his work on the case. He wasn't mentioned by Maline lately as being on their list of final witnesses.

Just a filler?

I wonder who he investigated.

Maybe he found the elusive and difficult to find DK.

 

[missy1974]

I'm curious about this witness Gary Robertson.

Opening statement said he may testify, but nothing about his work on the case. He wasn't mentioned by Maline lately as being on their list of final witnesses.

Just a filler?

I wonder who he investigated.

The thought crossed my mind that he is maybe the one that subpoena's the witnesses for the defense? I'm not sure what the rules are in California in regards to who can subpoena witnesses...

 

[Meemaw12]

I hope Law and Crime Network will post

Day 51 Part 2 soon

 

[oceanblueeyes]

RSBM - I think this is the problem, they do know in great detail their OWN witnesses. That is why Maline would prefer McGee to question Dr. Rudin.

Hi Missy!

But DTs work in tandem, Missy, and not in a vacuum. They all meet together very often to go over the witnesses they are calling, and what each one will be testifying to.

Honestly, I haven't seen any other DT this whiney that I can recall.

Imo, that's is one of the reason they have more attorneys on the DT so if something happens to one, the others goes forward, and picks up the slack to keep the testimony fluid, and progressing for the waiting jury.

As many dark days this team has already had they have had more than ample time to know their case witnesses like the back of their hand.

Imo its unprecedented how they have conducted their own CIC. First at how many delays have already happened even before the McGee issue since they started. Also how they are so ill prepared after having years to prepare, also including having so many dark days since they began their case giving them even more opportunity to prepare.

Imoo

 

[citygirl]

4 months.......51 days.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The thought crossed my mind that he is maybe the one that subpoena's the witnesses for the defense? I'm not sure what the rules are in California in regards to who can subpoena witnesses...

The DT goes to the presiding judge over the trial to ask them for any subpoenas they need.

Jmo

 

[MrsPC]

I'm curious about this witness Gary Robertson.

Opening statement said he may testify, but nothing about his work on the case. He wasn't mentioned by Maline lately as being on their list of final witnesses.

Just a filler?

I wonder who he investigated.

I have a feeling he is going to testify that he cannot locate Dan Kavanaugh or something like that.