What difference does it really make, since they discard what isn’t relevant, and they have a warrant for her phone data? There must be something relevant, that isn’t directly related to her “official” cell phone somewhere in that dump.
I think from reading the article that he was trying to argue that since they grabbed all the calls of all users from those towers that the warrant was overly broad and violated the rights of others. But not totally sure. He’s just grasping for straws imo and is just a blowhard
I don’t know why he is pretending he is protecting the rights of people that he is not representing; there must be something there that he doesn’t want to see presented as evidence.
very possibly -
If I recall, months back, he tried to get all charges dropped. Since that was unsuccessful (as expected), he wants all of the evidence suppressed. Just doing his job, but his reasons for suppression, dismissal of charges, and change of venue are bogus.
Agree...JS's goal is to keep MT out of court. He'll use any avenue he can find.
The fact that GF was there interested me very much. She has been present at none of the court proceedings up to this date, so I wonder why now? I don’t know how it all really works (even after umpteen episodes of Law & Order)-how would the process of getting a deal work? Who makes the first move? What would MT have to offer up to get one? I assume that any deal that is acceptable to MT would not include any kind of incarceration, and I imagine she would want her passport back. Certainly that would be unacceptable to either the prosecution or GF, though, unless she gave up something-like where they put Jennifer’s remains. MT may not have been involved with the actual murder or getting rid of Jennifer’s body but I think she knows what FD did with it. And I think GF thinks that, too. She wants her daughter’s remains back.
JS first tried to get the change of venue on another issue--that the crimes MT was charged with were allegedly committed in Hartford area. That was denied, I think?
That's my memory also. I believe Judge Blawie was still the sitting judge.
The way it went was, at first JS was saying that the crimes she was accused of would have been committed in Farmington, so she should be tried there, and he actually has a point, in my opinion. And yes, that motion was denied (not sure if it was Blawie). Now, he and MT are all over the place claiming that she cannot get a fair trial in Stamford because of all of the media attention. The problem with that argument is that there would be no media attention if those two would shut up, like Kent Mawhinney has. He keeps yapping to the press, some of which is actually friendly, like Lisa Backus, and Erin Moriarty. And she is all over X (formerly Twitter), shooting off her disgusting mouth about how she is being victimized by an anti-Michelle press, and all of the people following it. She and Schoenhorn are creating their own circus to start with. At this point, I don’t think it matters where her trial is held-I don’t think their smokescreen is going to help. She really is despicable.
Same here-they are just manufacturing the bias and hatred against MT. Seriously, if they presented to the judge what’s been reported, and the very few tweets (or whatever they call them now), the judge would probably say “this doesn’t impress me, and why are you trolling over there on Twitter?” Because from what I have personally seen, absolutely nobody is tweeting anything that isn’t positive, and then tagging her with it. 100% of it is her trying to gin up antagonistic responses.
I absolutely loved the response a twitter user gave to her yesterday of the infamous middle finger pic. MT then responds with 2 female classy celebrities holding up fingers taken down now, after they OP said don't compare yourself to them. That was epic. LOL
I feel essentially the same way about this. GF was there to make her presence known, and duly noted. And, her main concern is the children and what is best for them. If the best thing for them would be to accept a plea bargain, then that’s what she’d likely support. Is it entirely up to her, though? Or does the prosecution heavily weight her preference, and go from there? Not sure how it works…I wonder what the agreement would have to be? MT cannot just strut into court and pick whatever door that says “no jail time, no probation”, although I am sure this is what she wants, based on her tweets. So-what could the possibilities be? This is pretty interesting…and then I wonder how, or if, this affects KM’s trial in any way? Do you suppose that the state of CT has been waiting for 4 years, for her lawyer to approach them with a proposal?
KM's case has been lingering time wise behind MT's I believe for a reason - I think KM has already signaled his desire to make a deal. If not and they make a deal with MT they are signaling to KM that they are willing to bargain with him.
I hope Seattle weighs in-I have no idea how these things work, except that usually the State is at least interested in having a conversation about a plea deal, since, as you said, it frees up court resources. Let’s see what happens in the next month or so.
