cottonweaver
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2014
- Messages
- 8,973
- Reaction score
- 30,857
I am mystified by the court room flip-flop, moving 4 times (no less) within few hours, from Room 3B to Room Z (Zoom) to Room 3B again, and finally to Room 3G (see below). A ruling squashing this defense “motion to restrict public access to a small court room” should be no-brainer.
After all, Court proceedings are official businesses of the Judiciary as a Third Branch of Government. If “undecided decision makers" (to remain polite) were to flip-flop on this, the State should move with a “counter motion” under the spirit of Florida’s Sunshine Law (Section 286.011, Florida Statutes).
Any lawyer in support of the public access interests should be able to file a friendly “amicus curiae” motion in support of the State and/or the Court for the largest Court room available to uphold the largest public access possible such that "The Sun Could Shine" lights on the criminals. Any of the YouTube lawyers deriving income from commenting about criminal proceedings should be in support of the public access interests!
View attachment 527366
Apparently the room listings on Leon County website are being misinterpreted. Until the room change motion is heard it's a nothing burger. So let's see what the Judge decides. I still haven't come across a single credible lawyer - since July - who thought the room change motion would fly.
Locals who are familiar with the courthouse and the listings had already said, yesterday, that Everett's listings are often listed for courtroom B as default - it's just his designated court room. ( STS & Patty's Playhouse) Apparently, that is then often superseded by a real courtroom allocation.
STS confirmed that by calling the courthouse yesterday.
Ended up in a situation where there's been more online discussion these last few weeks about the room than the content in the motions
------
Anyway, here's a new STS episode.
Retired Judge Blitzmann remarks on ' provocative motions' which Everett might say are arguments about 'weight not the admissibility', at 28 mins below
( Also Brother Counsel Martin Radnor raises the issue of tactics of limiting testimony on call pattern evidence - and tactics to attempt keep out ' outside your house' etc as raised here on WS last week, WS page 38 re Tragos video. )
Last edited: