Chase Merritt Charged W/Murder of Joseph, Summer, Gianni and Joe Jr McStay #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Surely his lovely daughter could come up with a few nice things to say about him.

Lie to me once shame on them.
Lie to me twice shame on me.

The DT knows she wasn't believed by the jury in the trial. All DT family members who testified have lost all credibility. The DT would have been better off never calling them in the guilt phase to let the jury see how they all will lie. IMO, a very wrong defense strategy on their part because they damaged their own CIC by calling them in the first place. Now they are left with witnesses the jury knows aren't credible.

It truly shows the life this convicted murderer has lived when no one else will get up there to plead for his life except those with a vested interest to lie, and have shown the jury they will do just that at any given opportunity.

JMHO
 
Last edited:
Lie to me once shame on them.
Lie to me twice shame on me.

The DT knows she wasn't believed by the jury in the trial. All DT family members have lost all credibility. The DT would have been better off never calling them in the guilt phase to let the jury see how they all will lie. IMO, a very wrong defense strategy on their part because they damaged their own CIC by calling them in the first place. Now they are left with witnesses the jury knows aren't credible.

You are the best. I am thinking they should call Juanita so she can say he didn't mean it. MOO.

It truly shows the life this convicted murderer has lived when no one else will get up there to plead for his life except those with a vested interest to lie, and have shown the jury they will do just that at any given opportunity.

JMHO
 
Is it SOP for the DT to request polling the jury?
McGee's request.
All I could think was rubbing more salt in the wound of CM.
Guilty.Guilty. Guilty .
12 x 2.......24 guilty.
What was he thinking ?

I think he was hoping and clinging to his belief that at least one juror was wanting to vote NG, but they were intimidated into voting Guilty.

So he hoped that when they had to say it out loud, they would say ' I really meant Not Guilty'...:rolleyes:
 
I hope there will be an explanation of what she meant by "he didn't mean it," and verification of who "he" is.
It's hard to know for sure what she meant since we don't know the context of the conversation. Imo

I can't imagine anyone from the Merritt clan deviating from the Chase is innocent storyline. Most likely she is referencing Bennetts (sp) verbal outburst toward the media.
 
So they are having a week off?
Today is Tuesday, so either Wednesday was the correct day, or we wait a week.

JD Crighton‏ @JDCrighton 5h5 hours ago
#McStay: Judge told jurors penalty phase is est at 4 or 5 days. No court Wed, Thur, or Fri of this wk or Mon of next wk. A juror has conflict on Tue, June 18th, therefore no A.M. session. Judge anticipates Mon of the following wk, he will give instructions for deliberations.

They're having a week off--:rolleyes::mad::mad:
 
I'm sure that's the case in several states and the child of a defendant may be an exception whether I agree with it or not. I suspect in this case it was simply the lackadaisical nature of the judge that allowed it.

There is literally signs on every court room door in the three other states I've been to courtrooms in. They basically say no hats, cell phones have to be silenced, that children are allowed but they must be quiet and not disrupt the proceedings.

I've seen dozens of children over the last few years... newborn - 10 generally. I presume older than that people just leave them home. I disagree with them being in there because I'm in criminal court. You never know what kind of case is going to come up next.

I've only ever seen them asked to leave when it was a closed hearing though. So apparently others disagree with my opinion. :confused:

I'm talking about CA. This state. But it's policy. Not law.
 
The defense will have no witnesses to present in this phase. I am having trouble understanding why they would make such a decision?

They want to continue to claim that he’s innocent, so that closes off a number of strategies. If ‘he’s innocent’, he can’t say that he feels remorse for what he did. There’s no point to talking about what a horrible childhood he had, (I’m not claiming that it was,) because if he’s innocent, why would it matter?

And his children talking about how much they love him—the jury has already found him guilty of slaughtering a whole family—what are the chances that they’d want to go easy on him because he has people who love him?
 
I'm sure that's the case in several states and the child of a defendant may be an exception whether I agree with it or not. I suspect in this case it was simply the lackadaisical nature of the judge that allowed it.

There is literally signs on every court room door in the three other states I've been to courtrooms in. They basically say no hats, cell phones have to be silenced, that children are allowed but they must be quiet and not disrupt the proceedings.

I've seen dozens of children over the last few years... newborn - 10 generally. I presume older than that people just leave them home. I disagree with them being in there because I'm in criminal court. You never know what kind of case is going to come up next.

I've only ever seen them asked to leave when it was a closed hearing though. So apparently others disagree with my opinion. :confused:
I think Judge Smith made an exception to allow the boy since there is in fact a sign that says no children allowed. I can't remember if it was on the door or in his courtroom or both. Lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
149
Guests online
2,986
Total visitors
3,135

Forum statistics

Threads
603,343
Messages
18,155,163
Members
231,708
Latest member
centinel
Back
Top