FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *4 Guilty* #24

[Knitpicker]

I do see jow these programs might discourage marriage, and that’s not what we should want

Right.

 

[cottonweaver]

I said I have been very concerned since two witnesses were on STS the other night that it could open the door for his defense to file something regarding his conviction. Then to see this purposeful, smug grin made me really concerned. I hope that a defense attorney can give us some guidance.

My other thought was that Joel is always in touch with Ruth. I find it hard to believe that he would do something that could potentially jeopardize either case. Also, Tim J was on the next day discussing it and didn't say anything bad about that. But it makes me very nervous anytime anyone from a case speaks whether it's a juror or a witness.

I know. Like you, I'm cautious.
IDK why any upcoming state's witness is still giving interviews ( Whether that's Fitzpatrick on STS or Webster who's also been on several channels) and with previous witnesses from past trials ( Yindra on three channels although she's unlikely to testify in any future trial) , you have to be so careful.

They're all free to talk - no gag order.

Which reminds me, on CA's old jail calls, he was explicit that his lawyers would continue to monitor the SM of past jurors, in the hope that one of them slips up.
Thankfully, those Tally jurors seem pretty smart - they've not been clamouring to do interviews

 

[amicuscurie]

I know. Like you, I'm cautious.
IDK why any upcoming state's witness is still giving interviews ( Whether that's Fitzpatrick on STS or Webster who's also been on several channels) and with previous witnesses from past trials ( Yindra on three channels although she's unlikely to testify in any future trial) , you have to be so careful.

They're all free to talk - no gag order.

Which reminds me, on CA's old jail calls, he was explicit that his lawyers would continue to monitor the SM of past jurors, in the hope that one of them slips up.
Thankfully;, those Tally jurors seem pretty smart - they've not been clamouring to do interviews

I don’t see that anything they said could be argued as prejudicing the defense, since they didn’t speak of what they would testify to. Ryan did, as I recall, say he thought Charlie did it. But, the potential jurors will be asked whether they have seen anything about the case that could influence their ability to decide fairly.

What did worry me was Ryan’s appearing to me to say that he might be hostile or aggressive when questioned. He seemed to be saying that he is sick and tired of testifying and wants this to be over, and he might let them know this on the stand in some manner. I do not think this is a good idea no matter which side is questioning him, as I believe that appearing aggressive or unlikable at any time would make him less credible.

This will be the first time the jury has seen the case, I don’t think they are sick or tired of it, and I believe they would be unlikely to understand his feelings; I think it’s possible he would just come off as hostile or defensive, unfortunately.

I understand that it could be difficult and frustrating to keep getting called to testify. However, it is important for any witness to understand that the attorneys are not after them, personally, even when the questioner seems aggressive or obtuse. Both attorneys are just doing their job; our system of justice is an adversarial process, at least for the attorneys.

I believe that Ryan wants to see justice done in that case, but I believe that responding to questioning in anything other than a civil and neutral tone could, unfortunately, work AGAINST that objective.

I think Jeff LaCasse does an excellent job of remaining calm on the stand, and as a result he always appears to me to be telling the truth.

 

[Knitpicker]

I know. Like you, I'm cautious.
IDK why any upcoming state's witness is still giving interviews ( Whether that's Fitzpatrick on STS or Webster who's also been on several channels) and with previous witnesses from past trials ( Yindra on three channels although she's unlikely to testify in any future trial) , you have to be so careful.

They're all free to talk - no gag order.

Which reminds me, on CA's old jail calls, he was explicit that his lawyers would continue to monitor the SM of past jurors, in the hope that one of them slips up.
Thankfully, those Tally jurors seem pretty smart - they've not been clamouring to do interviews

Did you see ML’s video from last night?

 

[amicuscurie]

Did you see ML’s video from last night?

Ugh, hearsay is so confusing for me. There are so many exceptions that I don’t even understand why there is a hearsay rule sometimes. I only just figured out that the rationale is that the person who said it isn’t in court and can’t be cross-examined. I had thought it was because second-hand statements are inherently not trustworthy.

 

[Knitpicker]

Ugh, hearsay is so confusing for me. There are so many exceptions that I don’t even understand why there is a hearsay rule sometimes. I only just figured out that the rationale is that the person who said it isn’t in court and can’t be cross-examined. I had thought it was because second-hand statements are inherently not trustworthy.

Lol I listened to that several times and I still don’t understand it. I wish he made it easier to understand! I am now listening to it again.

 

[apeXperience]

Robert Alexander Morris

• Graduation from Florida State University College of Law, 1998
• Florida bar admission: 09/22/1998
• “Mr. Morris has regularly lectured on aspects of psychology and the law. He has lectured on the unique art of communication with jurrors (sic) during a jury trial. He teaches continuing education classes to other lawyers about the current state of the law surrounding jury selection and the art of jury selection.”

(Source: Robert Morris)

Morris is a long time resident of Tallahassee, FL. Undoubtedly, he is going to use his “art” to select jury members with whom he could buddy.

Have you noticed Morris’ scornful stare and facial expression toward the two State Attorneys when these women spoke in court? It is of concern what would be the Jury members’ attitude toward these women and the State witnesses such as Jeff LaCasse and Luis Rivera and Katie Magbanua, when Morris conveys such obvious contempt and disdain toward the State Attorneys he seems to consider as despicable and unworthy.

Will Dr. Robert Adelson be testifying on behalf of the State? How will look Donna Adelson and Morris’ facial expressions toward Dr. Robert Adelson if he were to be on the stand.