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

[missy1974]

I don't think the state is paying the high paid expert fees. There must be a cap on what the state pays. I think the documentary has been paying for the high priced experts. I don't think Chase will be able to bankroll those experts for a 2nd trial.

I think that is incorrect based on some of the answers I have heard about who is paying for them. Today the accountant said the "government" is paying him. La Rock also said something about the State paying for him. And there was another one, not sure who, but someone said something about the State schedule (fees) allowed to bill for a certain amount an hour... maybe that was La Rock.

This was also stated by @Bobcat1 previously (now I know why I was wondering if Maline was death penalty qualified and was wondering with McGee missing if it would have an impact)...

Mailine was not court appoint AIR. He became the choice of CM and McGee then joined the team because Maline is not Death Penalty Qualified by the State of California and McGee is. CM filed for indigent status and the court then granted the indigent status allowing Maline and McGee to represent CM and to be paid by the State. AIR

CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #15

 

[la2cabo]

To be clear, for myself anyway... there is a big difference between supporting Chase and just not believing the State has proven anything. That's my opinion. I recall early on in the trial even posting that I didn't want my criticism of the prosecution to be looked at like I was defending him, because I truly did believe that he was 100% guilty going into the trial, but unfortunately, even now, I still just don't believe they have proved it, and I don't know if I can put a percentage on it... but I know I am no longer 100% sure. JMO

Based on your comments, etc. I truly believe you are one that is still on the fence. I think you're trying really hard to give the State the benefit of the doubt but as you said you're just not there yet. While I still believe Merritt is 100% guilty I like your posts because they always make me think.

 

[missy1974]

Missy, come into the light.

LOL

 

[citygirl]

I don't think the state is paying the high paid expert fees. There must be a cap on what the state pays. I think the documentary has been paying for the high priced experts. I don't think Chase will be able to bankroll those experts for a 2nd trial.

The documentary? Yikes. This seems so wrong to me. And, it never occurred to me. Where have we come as a society? Capitalizing on the murder of this family? Two children with crushed skulls? Makes me ill. MOO.

 

[katydid23]

I think that is incorrect based on some of the answers I have heard about who is paying for them. Today the accountant said the "government" is paying him. La Rock also said something about the State paying for him. And there was another one, not sure who, but someone said something about the State schedule (fees) allowed to bill for a certain amount an hour... maybe that was La Rock.

This was also stated by @Bobcat1 previously (now I know why I was wondering if Maline was death penalty qualified and was wondering with McGee missing if it would have an impact)...

Mailine was not court appoint AIR. He became the choice of CM and McGee then joined the team because Maline is not Death Penalty Qualified by the State of California and McGee is. CM filed for indigent status and the court then granted the indigent status allowing Maline and McGee to represent CM and to be paid by the State. AIR

CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #15

OKay, so this could be a problem, that McGee is the one that is Death Penalty Qualified. If he misses the remainder of their witness presentations and the closing arguments, and Maline is not DP Qualified, isn't that an issue they have to sort out:?

 

[Texas Red]

You may be confusing defending DK with pointing out innacuracies of what the defense has inferred. I haven't seen anyone actually defending him.

IMO, there is a difference between supporting and defending as you mention in your reply. I don't believe that there are many here that outright defend DK but do support him. What I mean by supporting him is it appears he's being given the benefit of the doubt in instances where his actions actually portray deceit and deception.

Many of the comments I've read hear regarding DK's sale of EIP as being perfectly fine or it was just the registered EIP website ranking that he was selling, even though there's been testimony stating he had already been paid in full for whatever interest he had once owned in EIP.

Another example of the support he enjoys here is the Hawaii, question, where as CM is heavily scrutinized concerning the cell phone pings, when it comes to DK there's outright support that it isn't even necessary for the authorities to verify that he was ever in Hawaii, it's the defense's responsibility to do so and if they don't then too bad for Merritt. I hope these examples explain why I see things the way I do.

 

[missy1974]

Based on your comments, etc. I truly believe you are one that is still on the fence. I think you're trying really hard to give the State the benefit of the doubt but as you said you're just not there yet. While I still believe Merritt is 100% guilty I like your posts because they always make me think.

lol funny... I had just typed this out and then deleted it.. but I will retype it...

I am not 100% convinced of his guilt... but I will not lose sleep over it if he is convicted. I am not even sure I want to see an acquittal in this case although I don't think the prosecution has proven it. Right now, the best outcome that I can see is a hung jury, this way they can prosecute again and possibly do it in a better way. I am not sure if it's the evidence, or the prosecutors or if it's a bit of both, but I really don't think they have presented the case in a way that makes it as certain as we see in most cases. If he is acquitted, that's it, they don't get a do-over, and I'm not sure I'm 'comfortable' with that either... but if it happens, I can see why.

So yep, I would agree, I am on the fence still.... lol

I don't know about all of you, but when this jury goes in to deliberate, I will be on pins and needles waiting... I will not be confident in predicting any verdict! I am not sure that I have followed many trials where I felt that way, it's strange! LOL

 

[missy1974]

OKay, so this could be a problem, that McGee is the one that is Death Penalty Qualified. If he misses the remainder of their witness presentations and the closing arguments, and Maline is not DP Qualified, isn't that an issue they have to sort out:?

I'm not sure katy... is there no where we can get this confirmed? here is a link to his bio on his website, I would think it would say something if he was Death Penalty Qualified? maybe not?

@Mica ... you seem to be able to navigate the court site lol Is there any mention of it there?

San Bernardino, CA Lawyer | San Bernardino, CA | Wilson Wong Law

 

[citygirl]

OKay, so this could be a problem, that McGee is the one that is Death Penalty Qualified. If he misses the remainder of their witness presentations and the closing arguments, and Maline is not DP Qualified, isn't that an issue they have to sort out:?

Good question. Really feeling for Maline right now. He is getting saddled with everything.

 

[Edmo]

I believe we will have a hung jury in this case. It just takes one juror to think the State has NOT proven their case, unfortunately. I'll be surprised if we get a 100% guilty verdict first time around, but that is how our legal system works. Even though everything points to CM, I'm HOPING the jury will also see it.

The State started 3-4 years behind and simply have what they have at this point. I hope it is enough, but I have hard time believing 12 jurors see it the same w/o any bias toward LE or Prosecution Team. I believe he is guilty 100% and the Pros HAVE proven it to me, but I'm not a juror.

I also believe the State will definitely prosecute him again, **IF** we actually do have a hung jury. The MS's deserve every avenue of justice in this case.

 

[Mica]

I'm not sure katy... is there no where we can get this confirmed? here is a link to his bio on his website, I would think it would say something if he was Death Penalty Qualified? maybe not?

@Mica ... you seem to be able to navigate the court site lol Is there any mention of it there?

San Bernardino, CA Lawyer | San Bernardino, CA | Wilson Wong Law

With regard to death penalty qualified lawyers, I was unable to find anything on the portal. However, I did find The 2019 Rules of Court - Qualifications for appointed trial counsel in capital cases. Not sure if this answers your question though.


Title Four Rules

 

[Force Ten]

IMO, there is a difference between supporting and defending as you mention in your reply. I don't believe that there are many here that outright defend DK but do support him. What I mean by supporting him is it appears he's being given the benefit of the doubt in instances where his actions actually portray deceit and deception.

Many of the comments I've read hear regarding DK's sale of EIP as being perfectly fine or it was just the registered EIP website ranking that he was selling, even though there's been testimony stating he had already been paid in full for whatever interest he had once owned in EIP.

Another example of the support he enjoys here is the Hawaii, question, where as CM is heavily scrutinized concerning the cell phone pings, when it comes to DK there's outright support that it isn't even necessary for the authorities to verify that he was ever in Hawaii, it's the defense's responsibility to do so and if they don't then too bad for Merritt. I hope these examples explain why I see things the way I do.

Support for what the prosecution has presented, not necessarily what Dan has done since the disappearance. I don't have any reason to believe he was anywhere he said he was because there isn't evidence for that. I'm not going by what Dan says or the prosecution but by what the state has shown.

 

[missy1974]

With regard to death penalty qualified lawyers, I was unable to find anything on the portal. However, I did find The 2019 Rules of Court - Qualifications for appointed trial counsel in capital cases. Not sure if this answers your question though.


Title Four Rules

well, that makes it clear hahaha Thanks for looking!

 

[missy1974]

 

[la2cabo]

lol funny... I had just typed this out and then deleted it.. but I will retype it...

I am not 100% convinced of his guilt... but I will not lose sleep over it if he is convicted. I am not even sure I want to see an acquittal in this case although I don't think the prosecution has proven it. Right now, the best outcome that I can see is a hung jury, this way they can prosecute again and possibly do it in a better way. I am not sure if it's the evidence, or the prosecutors or if it's a bit of both, but I really don't think they have presented the case in a way that makes it as certain as we see in most cases. If he is acquitted, that's it, they don't get a do-over, and I'm not sure I'm 'comfortable' with that either... but if it happens, I can see why.

So yep, I would agree, I am on the fence still.... lol

I don't know about all of you, but when this jury goes in to deliberate, I will be on pins and needles waiting... I will not be confident in predicting any verdict! I am not sure that I have followed many trials where I felt that way, it's strange! LOL

Agree with everything you posted...thanks for retyping it. I'm hoping the state puts on an easy to understand road map of what's been presented so the jury can make an informed decision based on the evidence. I personally think Merritt is guilty but like you I don't think the state has presented a cohesive, easy to understand case. Likewise though, I don't think the defense has done a good job in their position either. And pins and needles is an understatement. Lol

 

[Force Ten]

Agree with everything you posted...thanks for retyping it. I'm hoping the state puts on an easy to understand road map of what's been presented so the jury can make an informed decision based on the evidence. I personally think Merritt is guilty but like you I don't think the state has presented a cohesive, easy to understand case. Likewise though, I don't think the defense has done a good job in their position either. And pins and needles is an understatement. Lol

I'm watching the hearing now. Maline sounds nervous and unprepared.

 

[missy1974]

For anyone interested... this is exhibit that was the topic of the hearing this morning. I recall seeing it before but didn't have a snip of it in my file, went back and found it and did the best I could to get it... Maline put up on the overhead screen for a split second lol

Sorry, this was as clear as I could get it!

 

[missy1974]

I'm watching the hearing now. Maline sounds nervous and unprepared.

Sometimes it's like I am watching a different trial... LOL

He sounded fine to me... Angry little elf Maline ... which is normal to me at this point lol

 

[missy1974]

Ok, so the answer to my question about the spreadsheets... is still not very clear after listening to Maline ask him about it at about 25 minutes of Part 2 from today. He said that he received the "ledgers" about 10 days ago (it was April 13th from a later question) from Brian (La Rock), who discovered them. Maline does ask him a question about it not being provided previously from the District Attorney's office produced to 'us' ... which was objected/sustained. Then he asks 'it's not part of the discovery you initially received before'... and he says yes.

I know that Rodriquez asks him about things he did and didn't get from the defense, but IIRC the ledgers/spreadsheets were not asked about... not yet anyway.

It's not like it really matters, other than the fact that I am perplexed that at least the defense didn't seem to have these before a few weeks ago when La Rock found them ... Knowing that they were, or at least a good portion of them have been discussed for years in the McStay forum! I just cannot see that the prosecution had these and they were not part of discovery whether they used them or not. JMO

I might have to go back to La Rocks testimony to see what he said about them. I do recall in his testimony that he was asked about sending them to the accountant.

 

[Force Ten]

Sometimes it's like I am watching a different trial... LOL

He sounded fine to me... Angry little elf Maline ... which is normal to me at this point lol

It seems like he is having trouble putting into the proper context of what he wants to address with Dan's transactions and other things. Typically lawyers are very clear in their wording and delivery. Perhaps it is because this is McGee's witness. I'm not faulting him for it but it came across as amateurish.