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

[Lilibet]

I hadn't heard that. I did a search but all I could find was his Amazon page where he contends that someone is reprinting his book 'No Goodbyes' and selling new copies on Amazon without his permission.
Rick Baker

He also said at that link that he would not be attending the trial.

 

[Force Ten]

DK is exactly who I was thinking of.

But you were referencing Mike having the computer.

 

[Force Ten]

Any Mods for this thread? I have a question. flagging my own post for this.

 

[katydid23]

Any Mods for this thread? I have a question. flagging my own post for this.

Darling136
Staff member


This^^^^ is the only mod currently online. You can send her a PM

 

[mrjitty]

Signing on...

 

[mrjitty]

Im really bummed because I thought DK had a solid alibi for being on the island.

they must have more. they have had 9 years to put this case together.

did they ever truly put the screws to DK? why not?

how is it they haven't come for him? no DNA matching him?

what about the knife????????????????????????????????????.....not good my friends.


keeping an open mind.

mOO

Why must they?

This is a classic "it was some other guy" defence - so they will throw mud at the wall to try to create a reasonable doubt

You can guarantee that the defence "evidence" DK did it will be innuendo and wild speculation, seemingly backed by some hearsay

 

[mrjitty]

The probative value must outweigh the prejudicial effect, in order to be admitted.

Unless the defence makes character an issue or otherwise raises the convictions - there are some exceptions

 

[mrjitty]

So far I am disappointed in the prosecution case. I hope they get their act together as the witnesses comes across as very unprepared and surely they have had months to go though anything to get them ready for this trial?

It is not allowed to coach the witnesses!

 

[Niner]

Monday, January 14th:
*Trial continues (Day 5) (@ 9:30am 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 (57/now 60) arrested (11/5/14) & indicted (11/7/14) of 4 counts of murder with special circumstance; plead not guilty. DP case.
12/14/18: 12 jurors & 6 alternates were finalized on Tuesday (12/11). 8 women & 4 men, while the alternates include 4 men & 2 women. Dec. 19 hearing will focus on evidence & details about possible jury visits to the both the desert grave sites & the McStay family home in Fallbrook. Trial to start 1/7/19.
1/4/19 Update: Jurors are expected to hear during opening statements Mon., Jan. 7, a tape of defendant Merritt being questioned by detectives. The interview with Merritt was made Feb. 7, 2011, a year after the McStays disappeared from their Fallbrook home & 3 years before Merritt was arrested.
1/7/19 Day 1: Judge will allow live stream of trial. Judge gives jurors initial instructions. Judge not happy with the number of cameras in the courtroom. Opening statements are done. Trial continues 1/8.
1/8/19 Day 2: State witnesses: Susan Blake (Joseph's mother). Michael McStay (Joseph’s brother). Trial continues on 1/9.
1/9/19 Day 3: Prosecutor tells the judge Mike McStay doesn't want to be shown on camera today. Judge denies request. State witnesses: Jennifer Michley (or Mitchley), former Fallbrook neighbor of the McStays, she is now from out of state. Michael McStay. Trial continues on 1/10.
1/10/19 Day 4: State witnesses: Michael McStay (subject to recall). Bruce Carter, He was security for the San Jacinto Shopping Center mall where the McStay's Isuzu Trooper was towed from on the Mexico Border town of San Ysidro. David Jackson. Jackson worked for the last witness. He was a security guard at the parking where vehicle was owed from. Kathleen Conwell, in 2010 she was an animal control officer for San Diego County. Sgt. Michael Tingley, San Diego Co. Sheriff's Office. In 2010, he was a patrol deputy for the Fallbrook area. Trial continues on Monday, 1/14. Will be dark on Fridays.

 

[InspectorGadget]

My thoughts after the first week of trial:

I distrust Mike Mcstay more than ever. I understand that it's been 9 years and things are going to be hard to remember. However, Mike was giving statements back in 2010 that contradicted eachother. I always got a bad vibe from him, but then I eventually told myself "He couldn't do that to his own brother and nephews." Once Chase was arrested, I accepted Chase's guilt and felt silly for ever thinking Mike could be involved.

Now it's come out that Mike and Summer had a falling out on 4th of July (not sure of which year, neither was Mike). And if I'm remembering testimony correctly- Mike said he drove by the house on Feb 6th?? Why would he do that? Not only did he live far away but supposedly he didn't know his brother was missing until the 9th....or the 10th. So, if he really did drive by on the 6th, then WOW. All that means to me is he is involved somehow, if he really did drive by on that date. His testimony became painful to watch.

So far, I find myself going back to my thoughts on the early days of this case: That Mike McStay and Dan Kavanaugh are liars and know much more than they are telling. Is it possible they are masterminds that framed Chase? Or, all 3 were involved, but only Chase is taking the fall? I wonder.

I find it interesting that Patrick McStay said in an interview that Gina Watson is the "Only person throughout this entire thing that I've been able to trust." So Patrick didn't even trust Joey's mom Susan or Mike, his own son, in all of this. Patrick and Mike having a falling out speaks volumes to me. I would like to think that Mike is simply having a hard time remembering, but like I said earlier, he's been contradicting himself since the beginning.

Dont you think that "hacker Dan" was the only one who had the technical knowledge to access the computer in the house remotely to plant stuff about Mexico? I dont think Chase could have done that. It's getting interesting though!

 

[mrjitty]

FWIW, DK was cleared many years ago as his alibi was corroborated and he was indeed in fact in Hawaii. IIRC, he contacted the McStay family either shortly upon his return to the mainland or immediately before (maybe both!) because he wasn't able to reach Joey via phone or text. He was legitimately concerned about the family!
All of the McStays were bludgeoned to death with the sledgehammer. You don’t discard a knife when a sledgehammer was the murder weapon. If a knife was found it was planted and has zero bearing on these crimes. Possibly it may have been an afterthought to create doubt or cast blame; a red herring if you will.
Initially, Chase Merritt told detectives that if he were ever to murder someone it would be DK. The same disparaging type comments he made regarding Summer and what a ***** she was in his opinion. All while referring to the McStays in the past tense.
CM forged checks, back dated them and tried to delete the accounting records and even went so far as to call the bank pretending to be Joey and requesting all of the accounting info be deleted.
DK had zero to do with this and I look forward to his name being cleared. The McStay Family and Friends have suffered immeasurably at the hands of CM. Please do not be fooled by the Defense’s antics and wait patiently because justice will come. It is horrific what the family has had to endure thus far in the trial and DK is another innocent victim regardless of what they try to sell to you and the jury. IMHO

I agree with all this.

The evidential onus is on the defence to produce an evidential foundation about "the real killer" to establish it as a real possibility - at which time they open the door to prosecution countering it

The prosecution is going to develop its case against CM. They are not obliged to spend time presenting evidence that other people didn't do it.

Many times in these cases the defence lawyers will indulge in wild speculation but that is not evidence at trial.

My guess is the defence's entire "evidence" about DK will be this hearsay confession

 

[InspectorGadget]

Through the time the checks were written until after they were cashed CM couldn’t have had any idea he would be overlooked the way he was. I can understand him being confident later, after the authorities believed the McStay’s had gone to Mexico and the bodies had been successfully disposed, but at the time the checks were written he had no idea that the investigation would proceed the way it did.

Maybe he was confident because he had a legitimate reason - he needed it to fulfill the Saudi order and was trying to keep business going - although that wouldn't account for the backdating. I dont think he knew how to access the PayPal. Does anyone remember someone quoted SB as saying, when she was cleaning up in the house "Summer wont need that where she is".

 

[InspectorGadget]

I don’t understand how any evidence found in the home or on the computer removed by MM could be used in this case. Wouldn’t it be considered compromised?

Yes, and it could have been hacked even without removal.

 

[mrjitty]

Thanks Niner for the timeline.

Inevitable, I suppose, but still frustrating, that the Defence seem determined to paint the lack of forensic data as evidence which indicates CM's innocence. (Rather than the stroke of luck to him that it really was)

I think the blood is a great example of how Juries can be confused

We know the deceased were bludgeoned to death so there was blood and a lot of it.

Yet people going into the house did not initially suspect anything

But this is true no matter who committed the murders.

It doesn't really say anything about guilt or innocence, because no matter how strange it seems, it happened.

 

[mrjitty]

While the defense has no burden whatsoever when proving CM innocent IMO the jury will expect them to show proof of what they have asserted to be true because they are wanting them to believe it is the named person they have told them and not CM. They aren't ever going to assume its true without verifiable evidence just because that is the claim being made.

Bit above.

I agree - especially technically as a matter of evidence.

The danger is that because the defence goes second, there is an opportunity for the defense attorney to engage in wild speculation about the real killer, claim evidence will be presented, but then not actually present such evidence at the end of the day.

The classic example of this was Barry Roux claiming he would present evidence Pistorius screamed like a woman. He claimed this in his opening, and then used it through his X-examination. Yet no evidence was ever given for this proposition.

even Judges get played by this IMO

 

[mrjitty]

Yes, and it could have been hacked even without removal.

Evidence is frequently recovered after long interludes - especially if the police don't yet know that the item is evidence

the mere fact that items have not been immediately confiscated by the police doesn't matter

e.g. the graves themselves were not located for years!

 

[mrjitty]

Hi all - I am a noob to the thread but intend to follow the trial.

I read up on the Mcstay case first when the bodies were found.

Wild case, and seriously poor work initially from LE has made things hard for the prosecution.

But as usual, not finding the bodies for so long is a problem.

 

[Tortoise]

Testimony from Det. Edward Bachman from the Preliminary Hearing transcript:

Snip

14 Q After receiving the call from their dad, Patrick, did
15 Michael McStay say that, or indicate to you that he attempted to
16 contact Joseph, Sr.?
17 A He did.
18 Q And did he say he did that on February 9th of 2010?
19 A Yes.
20 Q And what did he say was the result of that attempt to
21 contact his brother, Joseph, Sr.?
22 A He was unable to contact him. Nobody was there at the
23 house.
24 Q Did he call or did he go to the house?
25 A He went out to the house.
26 Q Did he attempt to call as well?
27 THE COURT: What date was that?
28 THE WITNESS: February 9th.
35
1 THE COURT: February 9th. Okay.

State of California VS Charles Ray Merritt: Part One - Transcript of Charles Merritt Preliminary

Here's a further quote from the transcript:

15 MR. IMES: May the record reflect the witness has
16 identified the defendant?
17 THE COURT: The record will so reflect.
18 Q (By Mr. Imes) And is this the individual that Michael
19 McStay was referring to?
20 A Yes, sir.
21 Q You said ultimately, at some point, they were in contact
22 with each other, the defendant and Mike McStay. What was the
23 result of that contact?
24 A They ended up meeting out at the McStay, Joseph and
25 Summer's house out in Fallbrook to go and check on them.
26 Q And when was that?
27 A That was on February 9th.
28 Q February 9th or February 13th?
37
1 A You know what, can I double-check the dates on that, sir?
2 Q Since my memory is different than yours, would it refresh
3 your recollection to see who's correct?
4 A Yes, sir.
5 MR. IMES: With the Court's permission, may he refer to
6 his report?
7 THE COURT: Sure.
8 (Brief pause.)
9 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I stand corrected, sir. I'm sorry,
10 he met Mr. Merritt out there on February 13th, 2010.

If you listen to the whole of redirect which isn't very long (I'm not saying you haven't Mica but for the benefit of the thread - starting at 24:47 in the testimony I linked above CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 ) it starts with Mike being asked about his mindset on that Monday when he made the missing persons report and he says he was worried and distraught and agrees that there is a possibility he jumbled up dates because of that and because he had nothing in front of him, calendars, notes or phone records etc, to prompt his memory. From the above transcript it's clear that Det. Bachman was mixing up the 9th with the 13th.

 

[Tortoise]

It is not allowed to coach the witnesses!

Right. And I think it shows confidence on the part of the prosecution that they didn't try to interfere with the witness's memory because it's not an issue - Mike in particular was not clear from the beginning so 9 years later it would stand out like a sore thumb if he started being clear now. It seems obvious to me that he isn't worried because he has nothing to worry about. A blur is a blur.

The defense came off looking like they are up to dirty tricks in that mix up of dates, by not showing him the portion of the same notes they produced where he corrected his report that CM drove by the house not himself. That will be harder for the jury to recover from IMO.

 

[Tortoise]

rsbm
The classic example of this was Barry Roux claiming he would present evidence Pistorius screamed like a woman. He claimed this in his opening, and then used it through his X-examination. Yet no evidence was ever given for this proposition.

even Judges get played by this IMO

Well not real ones LOL.

Did you have to remind me, I've been trying to forget all about Mr Roux. Makes my skin crawl.