CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #56 *ARREST*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think KB was still alive on Thurs 11/22 from 12:01 AM until midday when PF swung the bat.

What time was the tweet sent? That would confirm if it was by PF impersonating KB.

I also think @MsBetsy and I both must have read a rogue tweet somewhere!
Well, now that I think about it I think I remember two different things being reported. One was that Kelsey's mom spoke to her and she said she got the gun back and she felt safe now and the other was that there was a text stating that PF had returned the gun and they were going shooting that night.
Could there have been a call and a text, or was there just one that was reported inaccurately at first?
 
Well if they have one, then the defense should have it too being all discovery and information is shared nowadays apparently right down to naming your defense strategy. I would think they have reviewed all provided with a fine tooth comb.

Not arguing, definitely pro-prosecution, but the share it all nowadays rules have largely limited Perry Mason moments.

One thing we do know is if there is one, we most likely will not get to see it on camera :)

Imo.
We don't know if PF is going to testify, or those close to him are going to testify. If he does testify, we don't know what he will say. PF could still plead guilty before the trial. There are still many unknowns before and during the trial which would produce "surprises". The "Craigslist Killer" did not make it to trial, which was a "surprise", for example, even though he pled "not guilty" and was headed for trial.
 
Wondering what happened with the consumptive testing on those alleged teeth? Remember? We’ve never more about it. Anyone think they are holding that info until trial??

After all the hoopla about who could/couldn't be a witness of the test at certain facility, I recall DA Mays saying something to the effect that the consumptive tests were not, or no longer so important. There were also some unconfirmed tweets that test results were said to be inconclusive.

I expect we'll hear confirmed information at trial.
 
We don't know if PF is going to testify, or those close to him are going to testify. If he does testify, we don't know what he will say. PF could still plead guilty before the trial. There are still many unknowns before and during the trial which would produce "surprises". The "Craigslist Killer" did not make it to trial, which was a "surprise", for example, even though he pled "not guilty" and was headed for trial.

True. All we can do is guess. I don't see him dealing or pleading guilty but it is just a guess.

I truly cannot see him taking the stand, he would be grilled in the ruthless manner KK is likely to be. Both of these two were caught in lies pretty early on so it does not show me the ability to think quickly on their feet so to speak--or on the stand.

They will be well prepped I am sure, both of them, (if PF takes the stand in his own defense), but no one can hold their hand and whisper answers to them when on the stand.

I expect the defense is salivating about grilling her and the prosecution would have a field day if PF took the stand...

Jmo.
 
Wondering what happened with the consumptive testing on those alleged teeth? Remember? We’ve never more about it. Anyone think they are holding that info until trial??
As of Aug 23, it was 1/2 way complete.

Carol McKinley on Twitter
NEW: Consumptive testing on a human tooth found on #patrickfrazee's property is halfway finished. That testing is being done by the FBI. Motions hearing is over for today. EXTRA: Defense must let the court know if they are going to use an alternate suspect defense by 9/16. @ABC
10:54 AM 23-Aug-2019
 
Well, now that I think about it I think I remember two different things being reported. One was that Kelsey's mom spoke to her and she said she got the gun back and she felt safe now and the other was that there was a text stating that PF had returned the gun and they were going shooting that night.
Could there have been a call and a text, or was there just one that was reported inaccurately at first?
I remember reading all of this myself. Especially Kelsey going shooting- that stood out to me, perhaps because she was a single Mom and didn't feel as safe without a weapon to protect her and her daughter. I did wonder a couple of times, if there was something she was concerned about that caused her to feel safer with the gun- perhaps visits from strangers with coffee might have raised her alarm a bit?
 
We don't know if PF is going to testify, or those close to him are going to testify. If he does testify, we don't know what he will say. PF could still plead guilty before the trial. There are still many unknowns before and during the trial which would produce "surprises". The "Craigslist Killer" did not make it to trial, which was a "surprise", for example, even though he pled "not guilty" and was headed for trial.
What has me very intrigued was that PF had papers that he never signed for sole custody of the baby, claiming Kelsey was abusing her. It makes me wonder how long this monster had been planning this. Does anyone remember when he got the paper work to file for custody?

After that, he tries to get KK to do the dirty deed and she attempted to do it three times but backed out, except for the coffee. I just bet he was disappointed when Kelsey was fine and dandy after the coffee- does KK think we're all stupid enough to believe she didn't put poison in it? Did she think Kelsey would be foolish enough to drink her favorite coffee, out of the blue, handed to her by a stranger- something about finding her loose dog and taking care of it until.........I forget the rest, sorry! Help!
 
Well if they have one, then the defense should have it too being all discovery and information is shared nowadays apparently right down to naming your defense strategy.
^^s/bbm

Under Colorado Law, I'm not so sure that is true for the defense.

What Does Making “Discovery” Mean? The Term Is Based In Both Preparation and Investigation

Making discovery under Colorado Law– is the procedure followed by the state of Colorado prosecutors to provide a factual basis of to the crimes charged to the defendant or their lawyer. It is controlled by Rule 16 (below) of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Typical “discoverable materials” are police reports, witness statements, criminal history reports, lab reports, photos, interviews, and any other information bearing on the regarding the guilt- and even more importantly -the innocence – of the defendant. [i.e., exculpatory evidence].

Making Discovery Under Colorado Law (Getting The Police Reports) in a Colorado Criminal Case

Link above an excellent source outlining Colorado Criminal Case guidelines for the prosecutor.

Crim. P. Rule 16. -- Defense Disclosure

Part II. Disclosure to Prosecution

(a) The Person of the Accused.

(1) Notwithstanding the initiation of judicial proceedings, and subject to constitutional limitations, upon request of the prosecuting attorney, the court may require the accused to give any nontestimonial identification as provided in Rule 41.1(h)(2).

(2) Whenever the personal appearance of the accused is required for the foregoing purposes, reasonable notice of the time and place of such appearance shall be given by the prosecuting attorney to the accused and his or her counsel. Provision may be made for appearance for such purposes in an order admitting the accused to bail or providing for his or her release.

(b) Medical and Scientific Reports.

(1) Subject to constitutional limitations, the trial court may require that the prosecuting attorney be informed of and permitted to inspect and copy or photograph any reports or statements of experts, made in connection with the particular case, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons.

(2) Subject to constitutional limitations, and where the interests of justice would be served, the court may order the defense to disclose the underlying facts or data supporting the opinion in that particular case of an expert endorsed as a witness. If a report has not been prepared by that expert to aid in compliance with other discovery obligations of this rule, the court may order the party calling that expert to provide a written summary of the testimony describing the witness’s opinions and the bases and reasons therefor, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons. The intent of this section is to allow the prosecution sufficient meaningful information to conduct effective cross-examination under CRE 705.

(c) Nature of Defense.

Subject to constitutional limitations, the defense shall disclose to the prosecution the nature of any defense, other than alibi, which the defense intends to use at trial. The defense shall also disclose the names and addresses of persons whom the defense intends to call as witnesses at trial. At the entry of the not guilty plea, the court shall set a deadline for such disclosure. In no case shall such disclosure be less than 35 days before trial for a felony trial, or 7 days before trial for a non-felony trial, except for good cause shown. Upon receipt of the information required by this subsection (c), the prosecuting attorney shall notify the defense of any additional witnesses which the prosecution intends to call to rebut such defense within a reasonable time after their identity becomes known.

For the balance of the statute – not printed – click here RULE 16 – COLORADO DISCOVERY RULES

….(b) Time Schedule.

(1) In the event the defendant enters a plea of not guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity, or asserts the defense of impaired mental condition, the court shall set a deadline for such disclosure to the prosecuting attorney of those items referred to in Parts II (b)(1) and (c) herein, subject to objections which may be raised by the defense within that period pursuant to Part III (d) of this rule. In no case shall such disclosure be less than 35 days before trial for a felony trial, or 7 days before trial for a non-felony trial, except for good cause shown.

(2) If either the prosecuting attorney or the defense claims that discoverable material under this rule was not furnished, was incomplete, was illegible or otherwise failed to satisfy this rule, or if claim is made that discretionary disclosures pursuant to Part I (d) should be made, the prosecuting attorney or the defense may file a motion concerning these matters and the motion shall be promptly heard by the court.

(3) For good cause, the court may, on motion of either party or its own motion, alter the time for all matters relating to discovery under this rule.

^^ bbm

https://www.denver-colorado-crimina...e-information-you-need-to-defend-your-clients
 
What has me very intrigued was that PF had papers that he never signed for sole custody of the baby, claiming Kelsey was abusing her. It makes me wonder how long this monster had been planning this. Does anyone remember when he got the paper work to file for custody?

After that, he tries to get KK to do the dirty deed and she attempted to do it three times but backed out, except for the coffee. I just bet he was disappointed when Kelsey was fine and dandy after the coffee- does KK think we're all stupid enough to believe she didn't put poison in it? Did she think Kelsey would be foolish enough to drink her favorite coffee, out of the blue, handed to her by a stranger- something about finding her loose dog and taking care of it until.........I forget the rest, sorry! Help!

One of the odd things about this case is we go from poisoning which is often associated with female perps (not always) and is not a generally gruesome bloody murder to then things like iron rods and baseball bats. Why would someone who had time to plot want to likely leave a more obvious murder scene...

I picture it as KK mentioned poisoning, it did not work and then the next ideas were PF's regardless of what she said. He cares less as he will not be present and perhaps plans an alibi, and he sends KK. Yet in the long run he then himself uses a bat. Why make it so brutal and probably rage filled?

This sounds like snapping (but plotting had went on) or long simmering rage at KB.

Why create a bigger mess than necessary?

I don't know why I expect things to make sense in cases. I should know better lol.

Jmo.
 
What has me very intrigued was that PF had papers that he never signed for sole custody of the baby, claiming Kelsey was abusing her. It makes me wonder how long this monster had been planning this. Does anyone remember when he got the paper work to file for custody?
^^SBM

Makes me wonder if the custody paperwork was PF's back-up plan that he was going to immediately file in the event KB "escaped" her death as planned.

Other than the document(s) located during December 2018 warrant search of his residence, I don't recall if the paperwork was dated.
 
Thanks Pommy.

A December date was likely in preparation for his fight against CB -- especially after not allowing CB to see her granddaughter. How can we forget that December presser when CB stated she'd not yet seen baby K. :(
That was so heartbreaking. :( Keeping that baby from her was just downright cruel. MOO
 
^^s/bbm

Under Colorado Law, I'm not so sure that is true for the defense.

What Does Making “Discovery” Mean? The Term Is Based In Both Preparation and Investigation

Making discovery under Colorado Law– is the procedure followed by the state of Colorado prosecutors to provide a factual basis of to the crimes charged to the defendant or their lawyer. It is controlled by Rule 16 (below) of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Typical “discoverable materials” are police reports, witness statements, criminal history reports, lab reports, photos, interviews, and any other information bearing on the regarding the guilt- and even more importantly -the innocence – of the defendant. [i.e., exculpatory evidence].

Making Discovery Under Colorado Law (Getting The Police Reports) in a Colorado Criminal Case

Link above an excellent source outlining Colorado Criminal Case guidelines for the prosecutor.

Crim. P. Rule 16. -- Defense Disclosure

Part II. Disclosure to Prosecution

(a) The Person of the Accused.

(1) Notwithstanding the initiation of judicial proceedings, and subject to constitutional limitations, upon request of the prosecuting attorney, the court may require the accused to give any nontestimonial identification as provided in Rule 41.1(h)(2).

(2) Whenever the personal appearance of the accused is required for the foregoing purposes, reasonable notice of the time and place of such appearance shall be given by the prosecuting attorney to the accused and his or her counsel. Provision may be made for appearance for such purposes in an order admitting the accused to bail or providing for his or her release.

(b) Medical and Scientific Reports.

(1) Subject to constitutional limitations, the trial court may require that the prosecuting attorney be informed of and permitted to inspect and copy or photograph any reports or statements of experts, made in connection with the particular case, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons.

(2) Subject to constitutional limitations, and where the interests of justice would be served, the court may order the defense to disclose the underlying facts or data supporting the opinion in that particular case of an expert endorsed as a witness. If a report has not been prepared by that expert to aid in compliance with other discovery obligations of this rule, the court may order the party calling that expert to provide a written summary of the testimony describing the witness’s opinions and the bases and reasons therefor, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons. The intent of this section is to allow the prosecution sufficient meaningful information to conduct effective cross-examination under CRE 705.

(c) Nature of Defense.

Subject to constitutional limitations, the defense shall disclose to the prosecution the nature of any defense, other than alibi, which the defense intends to use at trial. The defense shall also disclose the names and addresses of persons whom the defense intends to call as witnesses at trial. At the entry of the not guilty plea, the court shall set a deadline for such disclosure. In no case shall such disclosure be less than 35 days before trial for a felony trial, or 7 days before trial for a non-felony trial, except for good cause shown. Upon receipt of the information required by this subsection (c), the prosecuting attorney shall notify the defense of any additional witnesses which the prosecution intends to call to rebut such defense within a reasonable time after their identity becomes known.

For the balance of the statute – not printed – click here RULE 16 – COLORADO DISCOVERY RULES

….(b) Time Schedule.

(1) In the event the defendant enters a plea of not guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity, or asserts the defense of impaired mental condition, the court shall set a deadline for such disclosure to the prosecuting attorney of those items referred to in Parts II (b)(1) and (c) herein, subject to objections which may be raised by the defense within that period pursuant to Part III (d) of this rule. In no case shall such disclosure be less than 35 days before trial for a felony trial, or 7 days before trial for a non-felony trial, except for good cause shown.

(2) If either the prosecuting attorney or the defense claims that discoverable material under this rule was not furnished, was incomplete, was illegible or otherwise failed to satisfy this rule, or if claim is made that discretionary disclosures pursuant to Part I (d) should be made, the prosecuting attorney or the defense may file a motion concerning these matters and the motion shall be promptly heard by the court.

(3) For good cause, the court may, on motion of either party or its own motion, alter the time for all matters relating to discovery under this rule.

^^ bbm

https://www.denver-colorado-crimina...e-information-you-need-to-defend-your-clients

Interesting.

I guess I meant more the general releasing all of discovery for both sides to the other. And the alternate suspect defense but I did not really make that clear.

About a week ago I read some documents and one was from KK's lawyer covering discovery and it was thorough. It went all the way down to things like they could not call some things work notes so as not to provide them, etc. I don't have the legalese for it but it was explicit covering ensuring every single thing was provided or that it should be provided per law.

I can only read a few of such things at a time, they get a bit dry for me :)

In general though, I believe both sides have what the other has for discovery by now.

Colorado law though continues to surprise me. I am still having a hissy fit over cameras :)
 
We don't know if PF is going to testify,
^^sbm

Given the case facts and evidence provided, I cannot fathom PF testifying in this trial.

Unlike a witness, a criminal defendant that takes the stand cannot selectively choose which questions to answer /or not answer. Once he invokes his 5th Amendment right not to incriminate or be a witness against himself, it blankets his entire testimony. It's all or nothing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
256
Guests online
353
Total visitors
609

Forum statistics

Threads
607,984
Messages
18,232,566
Members
234,266
Latest member
NotSoElementary
Back
Top