CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #2

[Alisajo]

Does anyone know if CM encouraged the McStay's to buy their secluded House?

 

[mrjitty]

When I have problems with laptop or phone, often they are remotely accessed by the Company I call.
Someone with such skills, probably can access the McStay's computer.

This stuff is only possible if the host computer is set up to allow access via a VPN

e.g. Teamviewer is a common way my team members access their computers remotely.

But you can't just tunnel in - the host computer needs to have been set up for remote access.

 

[mrjitty]

Got through the Sgt Armando Avila testimony

As far as I can tell from his testimony to date there is no suggestion a knife was recovered - at least he was not X-ed about it.

Defence made an huge meal over the order of the items in the grave, determined to show the panties and pants went in before Summers body, due to depth.

Seemed like very weak sauce.

Otherwise they x-ed on "contamination" potential.

I thought the testimony was pretty rock solid.

it's clear the bodies were dumped with the items found in the graves. IMO they were all dead. The location doesn't really suggest CM had a live Summer out there.

One also gets a feel for how close to a main road he was dumping them.

Suggests a hurried disposal rather than a careful driving far out into the desert with deep grave.

I suspect this was done at night.

Perhaps the defence team found a knife later.

 

[Tortoise]

The prosecution stated what was found in the graves in its opening statement. There was no mention of a knife. Why would this be withheld, I wonder?

I don't believe there was a knife in the grave. For one thing it wasn't mentioned in the prosecution opening, when they went through everything else that was in the graves. It would be a massive oversight to forget to mention one of the weapons found.

The other thing is I think McGee in his opening speech was referring to a theory of a knife having been used, citing evidence of the cut in the bra, which he wouldn't need to do if there was a knife in the grave.

Just a few snippets from his OS -

43.30:
""the bra strap and the left cup were inside the grave with her, the right cup was found outside, in-between the two it was cut, either knife, scissors? Say knife."

48.38:
"the fact that he was wrapped up - she was killed elsewhere, keys in his pockets suggest it's an issue - who drove it and when? Did Joseph drive it down to San Diego, and then was he taken from there? I don't know. Fact that Summer and the two kids weren't wrapped up again tells you they were killed at the grave site, her clothes were removed and discovered at the scene, the knife was there cutting the bra apart, sweatpants are off of her, they believe she was raped, bra showed that she was raped at knife point, that means there's two murder weapons at the scene. Now do we know if any of these family members were stabbed? No. Cut? No, cos all the flesh is gone. They could have been stabbed to death bleeding and their heads crushed with a 3 lb sledgehammer to make sure it's done. If you're one person why do you need two?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I don't believe there was a knife in the grave. For one thing it wasn't mentioned in the prosecution opening, when they went through everything else that was in the graves. It would be a massive oversight to forget to mention one of the weapons found.

The other thing is I think McGee in his opening speech was referring to a theory of a knife having been used, citing evidence of the cut in the bra, which he wouldn't need to do if there was a knife in the grave. He used it to cut her bra. This was not one of the murder weapons. Just a tool he used to cut the bra.

Just a few snippets from his OS -

43.30:
""the bra strap and the left cup were inside the grave with her, the right cup was found outside, in-between the two it was cut, either knife, scissors? Say knife."

48.38:
"the fact that he was wrapped up - she was killed elsewhere, keys in his pockets suggest it's an issue - who drove it and when? Did Joseph drive it down to San Diego, and then was he taken from there? I don't know. Fact that Summer and the two kids weren't wrapped up again tells you they were killed at the grave site, her clothes were removed and discovered at the scene, the knife was there cutting the bra apart, sweatpants are off of her, they believe she was raped, bra showed that she was raped at knife point, that means there's two murder weapons at the scene. Now do we know if any of these family members were stabbed? No. Cut? No, cos all the flesh is gone. They could have been stabbed to death bleeding and their heads crushed with a 3 lb sledgehammer to make sure it's done. If you're one person why do you need two?

Thank you. Now that I have read this line by line to me it is simply his musings and a knife wasn't really found in the grave.

I was under the false impression he was saying one had actually been found. I no longer believe that to be true.

What he says is a bunch of malarkey.

Bodies that were found as skeletons the ME was still able to know if they had been stabbed because the knife would leave damage to the actual bones when struck by the blade..

As far as saying there were two weapons used well Mr. Defense man it's hard to cut a bra into two pieces by using a sledgehammer. In fact it's impossible.

The knife he used to cut Summer's bra in two pieces probably went back in his pocket. It was used only as a tool to cut her bra. It was not used as one of the murder weapons.

This is nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

Imo

 

[geevee]

The sledgehammer in the grave looked pretty clean of any blood, and the only thing mentioned so far being found on it was white paint, I have a hard time believing he used it at the grave site to kill any of them and then cleaned it of blood so well before tossing into the grave.

I'm sure they did fingerprint and dna testing on it, that testimony should be interesting but seems to me had CM's finger prints been found on it, we'd have heard about it by now.

As to the poll a few pages back -

CM killed them all alone, although needed help to get back after dumping the truck near the border, my likeliest suspect for that would be CJ, as she already changed her statement once ('he was home when Joey called on 2/4', then when faced with the cell data - 'I must have been remembering another evening'.

Joey killed separate from Summer and the kids, probably in the afternoon at Chase's storage place, and Chase had Joey's phone as he drove to their home and killed Summer and the kids.

Moo

 

[Hatfield]

I did want to respond to your post reply to me in the now closed thread.

I am in total agreement that the jurors may be bamboozled by the defense.

For some reason that I can't really explain ....I am always uneasy about any outcome of any CA trial.

Lol! I know this!... they take much longer to complete trials. It makes me worry if any of the jurors will be able to recall and retain important testimony months later but I believe they are allowed to take copious notes so that's good. If any are like me their note taking looks more like a detailed book at the end of trial. Lol

In my own state even high profile death penalty cases on average it's over within 3 or 4 weeks and that includes the sentencing phase if convicted. The judges here believe in working long full days every day without down time.

They are even known to work right through weekends at times. Even on Sundays the judge will have the jury report after church time is over in order to expedite the trial time.

No doubt this case is much harder than it would have been if SD had not believed the family left willingly although to this very day that assumption still haunts me for it never made any logic sense. Imo

Do we know the ages of all of the jurors? Do you know if both sides hired a jury consultant?

I really hope that all of these jurors possess good common sense and logic. CE is revealing and very weighty but if one doesn't have the ability to link each CE fact together that can be a problem for the state.

If there are those like that on the jury then I hope there will be many other jurors that will be able to lay it out succinctly for them where they fully understand it all and how to apply it.

In most all criminal cases Occams Razor can be applied. Most cases are exactly how they appear to be.

Thank you again MrJ for joining all of us as we go through this long trial.

I don't post nearly as much as others in this case but I do read all posts daily and I am continuing to follow this case closely every day of trial.

Jmo

JMO
Very good points. I especially like this part:

"but if one doesn't have the ability to link each CE fact together that can be a problem for the state."

I havent followed this case too closely but my concern with high profile cases is the Prosecution can sometimes make things more complex than they need to. After watching quite a few other trials I have come to a conclusion that Prosecutors can help themselves if they can simplify the cases for the jury as much as possible.

One prime example of where I think the prosecutors made a case way too complex than it needed to be was the Casey Anthony case. I watched every day of that trial and they went way too overboard on the laboratory analysis experts they had. They went on for Days and Days and it was ridiculous because it was just not needed at all. If they would have simplified that case down and shortened their witnesses down to the main points I honestly think we would have had a different outcome. If they could have just stuck to the basic facts like
She Lied about her job
She partied all the time and wanted to party.
She looked up chloroform and other ways to kill on the internet.
Evidence of a body in the Trunk.
Body found down the street where Casey would play in her childhood.

The End. And IMO it would have been the end of CA's freedom.

On the flipside of that a good trial recently where the prosecution stuck to the basic facts and told the story was the Tammy Moorer trial for the Heather Elvis missing body case. They did a super job of keeping it as short and simple as they could even though they had to cover some detailed witness testimony.

The bottom line is the prosecution needs to be careful to stick to the main points and simplify a case as much as possible for the jury. If they can do that here then the prosecution should be successful. If they get too carried away with mundane details they could lose the jury understanding of what they are trying to tell them.

 

[mrjitty]

Thank you. Now that I have read this line by line to me it is simply his musings and a knife wasn't really found in the grave.

I went right thru Avila testimony and there is no mention of a knife.

The Defence would have needed to X on this, so one can only assume any knife is not a state exhibit.

 

[Tortoise]

The sledgehammer in the grave looked pretty clean of any blood, and the only thing mentioned so far being found on it was white paint, I have a hard time believing he used it at the grave site to kill any of them and then cleaned it of blood so well before tossing into the grave.

I'm sure they did fingerprint and dna testing on it, that testimony should be interesting but seems to me had CM's finger prints been found on it, we'd have heard about it by now.

Just adding a screenshot of the sledgehammer



taken from 11.00 on day 9 part 3 court video:

 

[geevee]

Just adding a screenshot of the sledgehammer

View attachment 165446

taken from 11.00 on day 9 part 3 court video:

Thanks Tortoise, I should have added that visual to help make my point.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

JMO
Very good points. I especially like this part:

"but if one doesn't have the ability to link each CE fact together that can be a problem for the state."

I havent followed this case too closely but my concern with high profile cases is the Prosecution can sometimes make things more complex than they need to. After watching quite a few other trials I have come to a conclusion that Prosecutors can help themselves if they can simplify the cases for the jury as much as possible.

One prime example of where I think the prosecutors made a case way too complex than it needed to be was the Casey Anthony case. I watched every day of that trial and they went way too overboard on the laboratory analysis experts they had. They went on for Days and Days and it was ridiculous because it was just not needed at all. If they would have simplified that case down and shortened their witnesses down to the main points I honestly think we would have had a different outcome. If they could have just stuck to the basic facts like
She Lied about her job
She partied all the time and wanted to party.
She looked up chloroform and other ways to kill on the internet.
Evidence of a body in the Trunk.
Body found down the street where Casey would play in her childhood.

The End. And IMO it would have been the end of CA's freedom.

On the flipside of that a good trial recently where the prosecution stuck to the basic facts and told the story was the Tammy Moorer trial for the Heather Elvis missing body case. They did a super job of keeping it as short and simple as they could even though they had to cover some detailed witness testimony.

The bottom line is the prosecution needs to be careful to stick to the main points and simplify a case as much as possible for the jury. If they can do that here then the prosecution should be successful. If they get too carried away with mundane details they could lose the jury understanding of what they are trying to tell them.

Good morning my long time friend.

I concur however cases like CAs are anomalies and rarely occur. If she had had any other jury other than the one she had she would be in prison for life right now. Imo.

Sometimes everything lines up for the evildoers instead of the victims. The only thing is it rarely happens.

The state in this case are trying to streamline the case. They enter the evidence needed and know when to sit down and not bore the jury.

The problem is the DT for they are the ones trying to hoodwink the jurors into believing that their mere theories and assumptions are facts when they are nothing of the sort.

It's the DT who is the ones who are stalling this trial to a crawl and not the state.

Plus they are the ones clogging the court time due to much longer than necessary cross examinations. They like nothing better than to hear themselves talk.

I am sure you have seen these same kind of ego engorged defense attorneys before as I have many times.

Nice to see you on this thread.

 

[Hatfield]

Good morning my long time friend.

I concur however cases like CAs are anomalies and rarely occur. If she had had any other jury other than the one she had she would be in prison for life right now. Imo.

Sometimes everything lines up for the evildoers instead of the victims. The only thing is it rarely happens.

The state in this case are trying to streamline the case. They enter the evidence needed and know when to sit down and not bore the jury.

The problem is the DT for they are the ones trying to hoodwink the jurors into believing that their mere theories and assumptions are facts when they are nothing of the sort.

It's the DT who is the ones who are stalling this trial to a crawl and not the state.

Plus they are the ones clogging the court time due to much longer than necessary cross examinations. They like nothing better than to hear themselves talk.

I am sure you have seen these same kind of ego engorged defense attorneys before as I have many times.

Nice to see you on this thread.

Thanks oceanblueeyes for the better understanding of how its been going in the trial.

I did catch one day of this trial where the Defense was doing exactly like you are saying, so I know what you mean. Hopefully the jurors are paying attention and can realize when the BS is flying from the defense.

 

[missy1974]

This is what really annoyed me about Maline's X

Starting with the cheque/statement on Thursday , he kept trying to introduce primary evidence under the guise of cross examination by using a state witness who is not a primary source for the info.

Hence the numerous state objections e.g

1. Placing financial documents in front of Sequieda when he did not create them nor ever see them before. How should he testify about them? Why should he be required to interpret them in 2019? This is not what a direct witness does. The witness shall testify as to matters that happened in 2014 that were within his direct experience.

2. Ask the witness to discuss CM's role in installing fountains around the US and internationally. The witness stated he did not have direct knowledge of this. The correct witness with direct knowledge is CM!! Or clients who had fountains installed. Or correspondence with Joey about trips and relevant travel records. Indeed the defence had a fine opportunity to put such exhibits before the witness to ask him if the dates might have been relevant to absences.

Funny they didn't do that!

3. Asking Sequieda to speculate about an argument between CM and his father. The witness may testify as to what he directly observed yet Maline asks him to speculate or give hearsay testimony. Again the defence has the correct witness to testify as to the nature of the argument. i.e the defendant Chase Merritt.

4. Attempting to give Evidence in Chief as counsel by explaining to the witness what made CMs fountain work so market leading. Correct witness is the defendant.

Fortunately the Judge was tight on each occasion - e.g. point 4 is an obvious attempt to put matters not in evidence to the witness.

Clearly behind the scenes, CM is very active in creating counter points to each witness, which the defence then tries to get in front of the jury via X

I realise it is a difficult line for the Judge, as the defence may later introduce some of this stuff via EIC, and this is the one and only chance to put matters to potentially related witnesses.

However I suspect what we saw was much more an attempt to have CM essentially argue with the witness, via his attorney, around matters that CM himself needs to testify to if the defence wishes to use them

Regardless of how or why they asked the questions they did, Prosecution included, it gets the information out there. I heard it, you heard it, the jury heard it.

I would love Merritt to get on the stand, but I highly doubt he will lol

I do wonder if Sequieda's father will be testifying? I think Carmen, the secretary, will be, but I don't get the impression that the Dad will be, I wonder why not (he sounds like he might get heated a bit more than David Sequieda, who seems a bit laid back actually lol)

 

[mrjitty]

It's the DT who is the ones who are stalling this trial to a crawl and not the state.

Plus they are the ones clogging the court time due to much longer than necessary cross examinations. They like nothing better than to hear themselves talk.

I agree

The state needed to call the biker, the responding officer as well as Sgt Avila. The first two are needed to establish a key part of the actus reus (bodies found buried in the desert). Avila is needed to support the exhibits re a forensic dig and recovery of grave contents.

But then there is nearly 1 hr of X!

Combined with the short court days this is going to take forever

 

[Tortoise]

Does anyone know if CM encouraged the McStay's to buy their secluded House?

Hi, I don't know the answer to this but welcome to the thread!

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Thanks oceanblueeyes for the better understanding of how its been going in the trial.

I did catch one day of this trial where the Defense was doing exactly like you are saying, so I know what you mean. Hopefully the jurors are paying attention and can realize when the BS is flying from the defense.

I have full faith that reasonable jurors really know when they are being fed a plate of chicken salad and when they are being fed a plate of chicken s###!!!! Lol!

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I agree

The state needed to call the biker, the responding officer as well as Sgt Avila. The first two are needed to establish a key part of the actus reus (bodies found buried in the desert). Avila is needed to support the exhibits re a forensic dig and recovery of grave contents.

But then there is nearly 1 hr of X!

Combined with the short court days this is going to take forever

I really think the one of goals of the DT is to wear the jury out with so much BS during cross hoping they wont even remember what the witness said in their direct.

The DT is trying to dazzle the jury with BS! Lol

Jmo though

 

[mrjitty]

I really think the one of goals of the DT is to wear the jury out with so much BS during cross hoping they wont even remember what the witness said in their direct.

The DT is trying to dazzle the jury with BS! Lol

Jmo though

Sgt Avila got quite tired of it at once point in redirect

Pointed out the obvious. The bodies were found in the grave, along with the items. Doesn't matter what height stuff was buried at. All that matters is what was in the graves.

 

[missy1974]

But it's eerily close to the date Merritt started printing cheques - February 1st. Somehow or other he had to have stolen a batch of blank cheques, the serial numbers for which were in the #4000 range and the ones in Joey's office were in the #4200 range.

Prosecution Opening Statement : "The sequence of cheques is before the cheques that were found in Joseph’s office.."

Unfortunately, we are going to have to wait for the dang accountants to testify to make any sense of the cheques. I get that the prosecution is kind of going chronological, but possibly explaining the financial side of this before we see witnesses like Sequieda saying "Merritt said he used the cheque for supplies", might help make sense of everything.

 

[Bernina]

That was his plan, no doubt, but the earth was harder than he expected it to be. He could not take the time. Burying four murder victims is not something that one does at one's leisure. He had to beat it out of there.

CM making gold panning equipment and gold hunting himself, he was used to making holes......I know these were posted way back on the McStay forum, don't know who originally took these but I found them again through Google.