Found Deceased CO - Gannon Stauch, 11, Colorado Springs, El Paso County, 27 Jan 2020 **ARREST** #46

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
DTPeke said:
Oh No. Is everyone accounted for on here? I wonder if this is Websleuths? :(

The Adams County resident was charged with official misconduct, a class-2 misdemeanor, and cited Tuesday morning by an investigator with the Adams County DA's Office. The charge indicates that whoever leaked the affidavit was a public servant.

A judge had sealed the affidavit to the public, but it was ordered unsealed after it was leaked to social media groups. A statement from the 4th Judicial District Attorney's Office says the person accessed the affidavit and released it to an online website that tracks crimes.
Click to expand...
I don't think it was posted on Websleuths until it was unsealed by the judge. Once it was leaked to SM sites they had no choice but to release it.

I hope this does not become a problem. Wasn't it due to be unsealed in a week anyway? I don't see what difference it will make.

The public servant who leaked it is in trouble, though.

Imo
 
Last edited:
DTPeke said:
Oh No. Is everyone accounted for on here? I wonder if this is Websleuths? :(

The Adams County resident was charged with official misconduct, a class-2 misdemeanor, and cited Tuesday morning by an investigator with the Adams County DA's Office. The charge indicates that whoever leaked the affidavit was a public servant.

A judge had sealed the affidavit to the public, but it was ordered unsealed after it was leaked to social media groups. A statement from the 4th Judicial District Attorney's Office says the person accessed the affidavit and released it to an online website that tracks crimes.
Click to expand...

My guess is yes.
 
MsBetsy said:
I don't think it was posted on Websleuths until it was unsealed by the judge. Once it was leaked to SM sites they had no choice but to release it.

I hope this does not become a problem. Wasn't it due to be unsealed in a week or two, anyway?

The public servant who leaked it is in trouble, though.

Imo
Click to expand...
I was joking about Websleuths, sorry in poor taste. o_O

It was all over the internet.

The judge did deny this requested sanction against the DA's office. I guess they got the leaker though.

Pulled from sanction request:

At paragraph 7 of Ms. Stauch’s Motion, defense counsel alleges that “Through investigation, the defense has learned that the original affidavit listed in the e-filing system was replaced with the redacted version of the affidavit. The redacted version of the affidavit was not sealed, and instead was accessible to the public.” Again, counsel fails to set forth any specific facts in an affidavit that were revealed through counsel’s investigation. This is important as the Court issued Order O-06 unsealing the affidavit at 11:20 a.m. on April 3, 2020. Any changes regarding the replacement or unsealing of the affidavit of probable cause after that point in time would have occurred as a result of this Court’s Order.
 
The @4thJudicialDA says this person “accessed the affidavit in a high profile, pending 1st degree murder case – knowing that the affidavit had not been made public.” Official Misconduct is a misdemeanor, punishable by 3 months to 364 days in jail, a fine of $250-$1,000, or both.

Catherine Silver on Twitter

Lead prosecutor handling the #LeteciaStauch says the person who leaked the arrest papers "does not work for the court system, but does have a log in" to access them. He says this person is not associated with the Stauch case.

Catherine Silver on Twitter
 
So, the big takeaway I got from DDA Allen's presser was that LS's preliminary hearing is still scheduled for June 5th and June 8th, and that he looks forward to presenting the evidence to the judge at that time.

We're only a month away from the next big step toward justice for Gannon.
 
The problem is I’m not sure they are going after the Person who mistakenly put the unsealed document in the efile system.

It seems as though instead they are going after the person that noticed it and uploaded it. Whether they knew it was not to be made public or not will be decided in court

jmo
 
Last edited:
DTPeke said:
I was joking about Websleuths, sorry in poor taste. o_O

It was all over the internet.

The judge did deny this requested sanction against the DA's office. I guess they got the leaker though.

Pulled from sanction request:

At paragraph 7 of Ms. Stauch’s Motion, defense counsel alleges that “Through investigation, the defense has learned that the original affidavit listed in the e-filing system was replaced with the redacted version of the affidavit. The redacted version of the affidavit was not sealed, and instead was accessible to the public.” Again, counsel fails to set forth any specific facts in an affidavit that were revealed through counsel’s investigation. This is important as the Court issued Order O-06 unsealing the affidavit at 11:20 a.m. on April 3, 2020. Any changes regarding the replacement or unsealing of the affidavit of probable cause after that point in time would have occurred as a result of this Court’s Order.
Click to expand...
Yes, I remember once it was leaked it didn't take long until it was officially released. We were wondering if someone made a mistake or the government official or employee leaked it intentionally.

That person is probably regretting it right now, but I don't see what the difference is or that it's a problem that it was released a week early.
 
ab01 said:
The problem is I’m not sure they are going after the Person who mistakenly put the unsealed document in the efile system.

It seems as though instead they are going after the person that noticed it and uploaded it. Whether they knew it was not to be made public or not will be decided in court

jmo
Click to expand...
Exactly. What they are doing is passing the buck. There was no intent to cause harm, and no one “knowingly” did anything. A clerk screwed up.

This will cause a headache for the wrong person, but won’t have any impact on the case whatsoever. The judge already told the defense to go pound sand, as this person isn’t a party to the case.

Even if they were a party, this wouldn’t help TS.
 
As to Gannon's injuries, I wonder if she poisoned him initially. Maybe that's why his tummy was so upset. I hope they can get all the receipts and examine them. I think she also hit him. As others have said, maybe a head injury with brain swelling, maybe a ruptured spleen, as sad as it makes me to type out all that. I hope she is put away for her "forever" and I hope she is unable to mingle with the other inmates, because I'm sure she would be a Queen Bee in no time (MOO, as former corrections teacher). I think she had been mean to him for as long as she was with them. That really haunts me. Poor child.
 
MsBetsy said:
I don't think it was posted on Websleuths until it was unsealed by the judge. Once it was leaked to SM sites they had no choice but to release it.

I hope this does not become a problem. Wasn't it due to be unsealed in a week anyway? I don't see what difference it will make.

The public servant who leaked it is in trouble, though.

Imo
Click to expand...
Yes it does make a difference , GS parents had the right to see , what we were able to read , first . CID would have talked parents through the points on the AA before the general public ( US ) could devour it .
 
MassGuy said:
Exactly. What they are doing is passing the buck. There was no intent to cause harm, and no one “knowingly” did anything. A clerk screwed up.

This will cause a headache for the wrong person, but won’t have any impact on the case whatsoever. The judge already told the defense to go pound sand, as this person isn’t a party to the case.

Even if they were a party, this wouldn’t help TS.
Click to expand...

Agreed that this is a nothingburger.

I'm really focused on the fact that DDA Allen verified that covid-19 hasn't changed the date of the upcoming preliminary hearing, and that we're still on track for the June 5th and 8th hearings.

Not only will we learn more about what the prosecution has gathered in terms of evidence against TS, we'll also likely see a massive document dump on the court website once that preliminary hearing is completed, including arrest warrants.

I wonder if any of the autopsy findings will be released in the preliminary hearing or not…what do you think?

JMO.
 
GordianKnot said:
Agreed that this is a nothingburger.

I'm really focused on the fact that DDA Allen verified that covid-19 hasn't changed the date of the upcoming preliminary hearing, and that we're still on track for the June 5th and 8th hearings.

Not only will we learn more about what the prosecution has gathered in terms of evidence against TS, we'll also likely see a massive document dump on the court website once that preliminary hearing is completed, including arrest warrants.

I wonder if any of the autopsy findings will be released in the preliminary hearing or not…what do you think?

JMO.
Click to expand...
How he died is important, and they’ll likely have the full autopsy results at that point, to include toxicology.

I do think we’ll have that answer.
 
GordianKnot said:
So, the big takeaway I got from DDA Allen's presser was that LS's preliminary hearing is still scheduled for June 5th and June 8th, and that he looks forward to presenting the evidence to the judge at that time.

We're only a month away from the next big step toward justice for Gannon.
Click to expand...

And it can’t get here quickly enough!
 
GordianKnot said:
Agreed that this is a nothingburger.

I'm really focused on the fact that DDA Allen verified that covid-19 hasn't changed the date of the upcoming preliminary hearing, and that we're still on track for the June 5th and 8th hearings.

Not only will we learn more about what the prosecution has gathered in terms of evidence against TS, we'll also likely see a massive document dump on the court website once that preliminary hearing is completed, including arrest warrants.

I wonder if any of the autopsy findings will be released in the preliminary hearing or not…what do you think?

JMO.
Click to expand...

When it is released, I'm going to have to depend on the good folks at WS to read it and report the findings, because after Sha'nann w/baby Nico and Cece and Bella, I can't bear that again. I'm so glad WS has such thoughtful and thorough posters who are willing to take the brunt of these cases.
MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 65 more.
Total: 3,046 (members: 66, guests: 2,980)

Online statistics

Members online
66
Guests online
2,980
Total visitors
3,046
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,296
Messages
18,138,502
Members
231,313
Latest member
melissaw
Back
Top