FL - Sarah Boone, 42, charged with murdering boyfriend Jorge Torres, 42, by leaving him locked in suitcase, Winter Park, Feb 2020

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Is there such a thing as trial in absentia? I can think of one recently where the defendant refused to appear but the trial continued on without him. But of course he had counsel, who appeared on his sorry behalf. I can think of another where there judge ruled the defendant HAD to be there, by force if necessary. Again, with counsel. And I can think if still another where a defendant CHOSE to self-represent where the judge ordered a public defender to be present, essentially as a consultant for the defendant.

She doesn't know the first thing about preparing a proper defense and already my ears are bleeding imagining her in the courtroom with a microphone.

I'm trying to understand how this actually works. The judge can't order her NO defense. Maybe hold her in some mind of contempt for delaying justice? Big fat time-out until she's ready to behave?

Sounds to me like her main objection is that none of her 7000 attorneys will listen to her. Spin machine. Fact: she won't listen to them.

If she is acting as her own defense, can the judge sanction her? Limit her defense on account of these delay infractions?

Is there precedence for a judge refusing to appoint another PD?

Does he have the power to muzzle her?

Can he appoint counsel and order them to proceed based on the case and discovery without her cooperation?

In what world is it even OK for a party to a lawsuit, civil or criminal, to contact the judge directly?!

Of course, she's done a fine number of insulting the judge.

I'm tired already, but I don't think we've heard the end of this.

JMO

I agree with all your points and have the same questions.

I don't know how it works in the USA but here in the UK a person can absolutely be sentenced in their absence (ie refusing to attend / repeatedly refusing to leave cells).

I think, if I understood correctly, on the days of court hearings, SB will have an on duty lawyer present in court to guide and assist in the practicalities in the moment but that is not her lawyer or 'representation'.

 

[Megnut]

Since she's repeatedly refused to work with her appointed counsel, I'd like to see the judge appoint her new counsel and allow them to proceed without her.

I'm supposing she ate up every minute of her legal sessions with HER MOUTH. Because, of course, she's the smartest person in every room.

If we get to trial with her representing herself, Jodi Arias' trial will look like a somber affair.

JMO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Aside for justice for Jorge, I'm looking forward to this trial for entertainment value. I'm puzzled as to how it will proceed, there's absolutely no working with a defiant Narc, so whole thing will be an unmanageable circus.

In my estimation, SB will do whatever it takes to prevent the trial going ahead up to the point of 'acting out' in the court room. That could be by way of verbal outbursts, bizarre behaviours, or feigning / enacting medical events as well as possible self harm or violence. She could even legit have a mental break when she finally realises there's no way out of this. I think at some point she'll be prevented from attending her own hearing in person and the case will go ahead with whomsoever is the duty court lawyer and clerks.

IMO there's no way SB could be willing or able to sit in the court room whilst the prosecution play the video footage to the jury. JMO MOO