CO - James Holmes Trial - *Penalty Phase* #3

[Dogface]

Wait, is there no court today? Why?!?

 

[turaj]

Wait, is there no court today? Why?!?

This jury has many Fridays off and they make plans to possibly catch up on their jobs etc. and so far have indicated no flexibility in this...so even just getting this later yesterday they are off today. They also do not want to stay past the 5pm stop time. Probably for the best as they seem to really need some rest and get away from each other...so many sick. But....these long weekends usually result in a juror or two or attorney coming in on Monday to the judge with issues of exposure to the case over the weekend. I imagine Judge Semour is holding his breath hoping to get through this without a major problem...he is a great judge but even he is getting to the point of a "short fuse" with some of this stuff.

 

[luvmygarden]

I thought Brady's reaction was about what I expected as they only have the mental illness hat to try to avoid DP for their client....I think this woman had a well thought out agenda here just at their client did and bet a bit of checking around will find her an activist against dp and other things. She will be on the streets soon (3 weeks most) and that is scary thought....she may want to carry on in her "jimmy's" tradition.

So if the jury comes back and feels enough mitigation was presented and they want to stop here with lwop I can't help but wonder if the state has any cause to want a do over on this phase based on a woman ranting about mental illness which is at the heart and soul of the defense case. I do not think we have heard the end of this.

Brady's reaction made me think hmmmm was this planned by the defense? After a split second I thought no they wouldn't do that, Would they?

 

[MissHaley]

Brady's reaction made me think hmmmm was this planned by the defense? After a split second I thought no they wouldn't do that, Would they?

You know, Brady's response really did surprise me. As an officer of the court, I would think she would be just as offended as the judge was to the major disruption! For Brady to embrace the woman because she clearly was on the 'defense's' side, there should be no bias for the women for that reason. IMO, Brady's bias about MI should have no part in 'willful disrespect to the court'! IMO, Because this benefited the defense & was against the DA, it seemed like it didn't bother her at all!

 

[MissHaley]

This was posted by Carol McKinley, a reporter who has been in the courtroom thru the trial.

Carol McKinley ‏@CarolAMcKinley [video=twitter;627148956921954305]https://twitter.com/CarolAMcKinley/status/627148956921954305[/video] Video: 7 Things you may not have seen on the courtroom monitor 1. Deborah Cave is in the back row. She’s... http://tmblr.co/ZdVdok1qvkhLE

One of her observations of Cave, all week -
6. A couple of male reporters who have beenin the courtroom are talking about Cave’s strange behavior all week.They’re shaken up because she made a pass at both of them. My friend JulieGautier who is a CBS producer, had to put her dog down the other day. She saidCave approached her in the elevator, “Is he a bad dog?” and something about himdeserving it.

Carol stated that all 10 attorneys were present during the hearing.

 

[Maisiebelle]

I'm sure the defence team would have been yelling for a mistrial if this woman hasn't been trying to support the shooter.

I have a question. When people are referring to Deborah Cave as "nuts" and "nutso" do they mean she just did an outrageous thing or does that mean mentally ill?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MissHaley]

Advisement for Deborah Cave, woman jailedfor #theatershootingcourtroom outburst Thurs, may include charge for kneeing deputy in eye.
Will C. Holden ‏@will_c_holden[video=twitter;627172505988505600]https://twitter.com/will_c_holden/status/627172505988505600[/video]
@RobLowTVsays Deborah Cave, the woman jailed 3 weeks for her #theatershootingcourtroom outburst yesterday, will be in court today at 2 PM.

 

[MissHaley]

Rob Low ‏@RobLowTV [video=twitter;627189288027840512]https://twitter.com/RobLowTV/status/627189288027840512[/video] Castlewood, CO Homeless Woman jailed for outburst #theatershooting trial lists Greenwood Village UPS as home address. @KDVR

 

[Dogface]

This jury has many Fridays off and they make plans to possibly catch up on their jobs etc. and so far have indicated no flexibility in this...so even just getting this later yesterday they are off today. They also do not want to stay past the 5pm stop time. Probably for the best as they seem to really need some rest and get away from each other...so many sick. But....these long weekends usually result in a juror or two or attorney coming in on Monday to the judge with issues of exposure to the case over the weekend. I imagine Judge Semour is holding his breath hoping to get through this without a major problem...he is a great judge but even he is getting to the point of a "short fuse" with some of this stuff.

Thanks!!Friday's are my busy days and I guess I haven't noticed they had a lot of them off! I agree they definitely deserve the break and hopefully can balance the trial with some normalcy. I can't even imagine what a weight this must be on their shoulders!

 

[borndem]

I'm sure the defence team would have been yelling for a mistrial if this woman hasn't been trying to support the shooter.

I have a question. When people are referring to Deborah Cave as "nuts" and "nutso" do they mean she just did an outrageous thing or does that mean mentally ill?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably a bit of both -- usually the terms, "nuts" and "nutso" are used lightly -- not a serious description of someone who is really mentally ill. When someone does something silly or proposes something ridiculous, one might say, "Are you nuts?" and it is not taken as an insult, it's like a similar reply of, "Are you crazy?" But in a certain context, it could be considered more seriously, but certainly not as a usual thing.

 

[geevee]

xxxx‏@xxxx · 48m48 minutes ago
@will_c_holden @TrialDiariesJ @RobLowTV WIll it be streamed?

Will C. Holden ‏@will_c_holden · 23m23 minutes ago
@lovespink22 @TrialDiariesJ @RobLowTV No. Court made special arrangements 4 #theatershooting trial. This hearing isn't exactly on same level
------

Darn, I was hoping one of the streams would be showing it, it must have been quite a tussle as they were hauling her to the lockup for her to be able to knee a deputy in the eye.

 

[MissHaley]

So I took time to watch GB closing again - as I was quite distracted from the event. I suggest re-watching it. GB points out important points about what the law states for mitigation.

As the defense kept stating mental illness, most people, at least I was- were assuming mental illness was a mitigate.

According to the law, and he shows it clearly- it is not that a person who has MI is a mitigator , BUT, if they have decreased capacity that prevents them from distinguishing between right & wrong. He explains it very well. Because the defense kept saying the 'but for mental illness' statement. But a person having mental illness does not mitigate their actions.

He starts around Time 39:01 [video=youtube;4KYUaNbYfFE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KYUaNbYfFE[/video]

 

[turaj]

I'm sure the defence team would have been yelling for a mistrial if this woman hasn't been trying to support the shooter.

I have a question. When people are referring to Deborah Cave as "nuts" and "nutso" do they mean she just did an outrageous thing or does that mean mentally ill?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So true it is just a shame...they probably should have had a deputy sitting right next to her so if she did anything they could subdue her faster...she really got some time to yell alot of things out.

 

[borndem]

So I took time to watch GB closing again - as I was quite distracted from the event. I suggest re-watching it. GB points out important points about what the law states for mitigation.

As the defense kept stating mental illness, most people, at least I was- were assuming mental illness was a mitigate.

According to the law, and he shows it clearly- it is not that a person who has MI is a mitigator , BUT, if they have decreased capacity that prevents them from distinguishing between right & wrong. He explains it very well. Because the defense kept saying the 'but for mental illness' statement. But a person having mental illness does not mitigate their actions.

He starts around Time 39:01 [video=youtube;4KYUaNbYfFE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KYUaNbYfFE[/video]

Many thanks for this -- I am going to do what you did, plus I have your advice/hints for the "mitigate" part of this that he explains. Very interesting. Makes me more hopeful about the jury understanding what is and what isn't.

 

[Maisiebelle]

Probably a bit of both -- usually the terms, "nuts" and "nutso" are used lightly -- not a serious description of someone who is really mentally ill. When someone does something silly or proposes something ridiculous, one might say, "Are you nuts?" and it is not taken as an insult, it's like a similar reply of, "Are you crazy?" But in a certain context, it could be considered more seriously, but certainly not as a usual thing.

Thanks for explaining. It sounds similar to something used here in the UK. They say "he/she was mental!" - not to mean mentally ill but rather to mean what he/she did or said was really strange and not sensible at all.

I'm a bit concerned about the closing from the prosecution. I was watching closely and listening but when I think back all I remember is that woman shouting out. We have the opportunity to watch the video back, the jury does not. I hope they can remember what was being said. If I was GB I would have asked to start again in the interest of fairness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[turaj]

Thanks for explaining. It sounds similar to something used here in the UK. They say "he/she was mental!" - not to mean mentally ill but rather to mean what he/she did or said was really strange and not sensible at all.

I'm a bit concerned about the closing from the prosecution. I was watching closely and listening but when I think back all I remember is that woman shouting out. We have the opportunity to watch the video back, the jury does not. I hope they can remember what was being said. If I was GB I would have asked to start again in the interest of fairness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He mentioned the fact that he could see the jurors attention go to the person and then to all the yelling even outside the courtroom...he was well aware that he lost them for awhile. and that is critical as his closing was limited to 40 minutes ..as he spoke after he still seemed stunned and not sure what to say to the judge....there will always now be a questionmark as to the impact of that outburst.

 

[Maisiebelle]

He mentioned the fact that he could see the jurors attention go to the person and then to all the yelling even outside the courtroom...he was well aware that he lost them for awhile. and that is critical as his closing was limited to 40 minutes ..as he spoke after he still seemed stunned and not sure what to say to the judge....there will always now be a questionmark as to the impact of that outburst.

I wonder if it's too late for him to do something about it now the jury have gone to deliberate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maisiebelle]

The shooter had a good look at Deborah Cave during her outburst. At least he's finally noticed her. She should be happy.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[turaj]

I wonder if it's too late for him to do something about it now the jury have gone to deliberate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wondered about that too but I believe his "window of opportunity" would have been right after it and as I have mentioned he is such a put together guy but really looked bewildered and just kept on talking.

 

[Maisiebelle]

Charges against Deborah Cave.

www.twitter.com/thegoldpatrol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk