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

[nodamselindistress]

I hope it is dawning on her after today that she is hopelessly lost and in way over her head. She wants to make statements instead of asking questions to the witnesses. She is going to have no idea how to object correctly.

 

[Megnut]

If she weren't such a cluster, she would plow through discovery in order to process it as a whole. Then organize her thoughts and approach and prioritize issues.

Because she's a contrarian, she is going to find objection with every word, paragraph, punctuation and page.

Lord, have mercy. This is going to be wild.

JMO

 

[arielilane]

Next hearings:

Media issue (and other issues) hearing: August 14 @1:30 pm ET.

Physical evidence hearing: Sept 3 @ 9:00 am ET.

 

[arielilane]

During trial the defendant will not be restrained- no handcuffs
However, defendant is to wear device under clothing which is designed to send 50,000 volt electric shocks into midsection. Defendant will seat at defense table and limited to a certain area of the courtroom. moo

 

[steeltowngirl]

Oh @gitana1 Sarah Boone is looking for you! How could you possibly pass up such an opportunity?!?

View attachment 522924

In all seriousness…run.Run far far away!

Oh dear. Just seeing this tonight.

I read the first line without glasses and thought it said “are you looking for a preposterous challenge?”

 

[sasha17]

During trial the defendant will not be restrained- no handcuffs
However, defendant is to wear device under clothing which is designed to send 50,000 volt electric shocks into midsection. Defendant will seat at defense table and limited to a certain area of the courtroom. moo

Thanks for all the updates! I'm watching the video tonight. It sounds like the "stun belt" device that SB will be wearing is this: Use of Stun Belts by New York Corrections Officers

 

[sasha17]

The judge in today's hearing said he'll be citing the Miami Herald case in deciding whether or not to allow media access to the physical evidence hearing. Here is that case I believe he's talking about: Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Lewis

From that case decision: "A trial is a public event, and there is no special perquisite of the judiciary which enables it to suppress, edit or censor events which transpire in proceedings before it, and those who see and hear what transpired may report it with impunity, subject to constitutional restraints mentioned herein."

 

[gitana1]

Huh?

Regardless of how she has ended up representing herself, in my opinion in the name of justice, she should have a right to have appointed standby counsel just like other Pro se defendant's do.

At least someone to whisper to her when she can speak and not speak, call witnessess, object, approach bench, and help her follow simple normal procedural guidelines.

How else will she be able to conduct her own trial Pro se?

She has all ready told the judge she is "thoroughly confused" as to why everyone knew about her last 2 hearings except her. She even complained that the media knew about her hearing when she did not, given the fact the media was righ there recording her hearing. She asked "Shouldn't she be included if she is Pro se?"

I have never heard of a Pro se defendant not wanting to be a Pro se defendant.

**** SCRATCHING HEAD ****

2 Cent Confusion

I think the reason she’s not is because she’s not a voluntary pro se. She waived her right to government -paid counsel and that includes stand-by counsel. She would be abusing that person too.

Of course, she’s still free to hire someone.

But yeah, it seems impossible for her to even marginally represent herself. There is so much that she could not begin to comprehend. Like how to enter evidence. Etc. It’s going to be a mess.

The only thing that gives me pause about possible appealability is whether she was warned enough or strongly enough, that her behavior would ultimately result in a waiver.

Maybe the judge will assign some court professional to work with her on a plea agreement if she wants one. These are "deadly" serious, like an important contract that a person should not be signing without having an attorney read it.

@gitana1

Any thoughts on these 4 things?

1.) Sarah getting appointed standby counsel?

2.) Sarah getting counsel to write up a plea deal if this is what she wants?

3.) In your professional opinion how do you think Sarah's trial will go with or without her having standby counsel?

4.) Do you think the judge is correct in assuming that Sarah is deliberately resisting counsel to delay her jury trial? He said actions speak louder than words and that her words tell the story she wants counsel for a trial but her actions show she does not want a trial....or wants it put off as long as possible.

Sorry to bother you with all these questions but I very much appreciate having a verified attorney on this thread. I hope you comment on this thread during Sarah's actual trial.

I am guessing that alot of posters are as perplexed as I am about this whole debacle.

2 Cents.....Thank You very much @gitana1

1. He has stated she is not entitled to standby counsel as she has waived her right to a free attorney totally. So she’s not going to get one.

2. She doesn’t need counsel to write it up. It’s really just the deal that’s important. The state usually fills out the form and then the defendant and their counsel reviews it and the judge will go over each provision of the deal with them.

3. Ship show. I mean she has some smarts. So she will be able to do some things. But I believe she’s going to act about half as bad as the guy who rammed his car into a bunch of parade-goers and then represented himself. I can’t wait for opening statements.

4. I don’t know. I think she is personality disordered and very hard to deal with in general. So I think she couldn’t cope with the attorney-client relationship. She feels she knows best and is entitled to getting her behind kissed. I think that’s why she killed her boyfriend. But the delays were likely something she enjoyed because somehow (I believe) she thought she’d find an attorney who was “smart” enough to do things her way. Also, she probably can’t face what’s coming.

And prison is so much worse than jail, typically.

 

[Megnut]

Will somebody come literally to her defense? Civil liberties attorney who will volunteer to assist/standby for free? Already I pity such a person because GAH, SB is SB. I just wonder if that's even a thing.

Hencewithforesooth.

JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

Will somebody come literally to her defense? Civil liberties attorney who will volunteer to assist/standby for free? Already I pity such a person because GAH, SB is SB. I just wonder if that's even a thing.

Hencewithforesooth.

JMO

An interesting point....how can she pay for an attorney unless pro bono?

She lost her right to have the court pay for an attorney even if an attorney steps up and says they will accept court payment.

So not only does she need a 9th or 10th attorney, she needs this attorney to do it all for free.
Then on top of that, it has to be an attorney that meets her specifications.

I do not know of any defendant who is Pro se when they do not want to be Pro se.

This is absolutely unchartered waters, a flooded disaster.

2 Cents

 

[gitana1]

She also lies out loud in the last hearing! She previously had told judge that she wants a laptop instead of printed materials for review of the discovery but then in the hearing, she claimed she never said that and it's not true. Does she not realize the court records everything?! She can't even keep her own story straight about her requests to receive the discovery materials. If she makes it to trial, it'll be a disaster.

I think she just likes to complain about everything and act oppressed. She must know deep down that she is screwed so she maybe thinks if she can prove her trial wasn’t fair, she will get a new one and eventually a jury will believe her.

 

[gitana1]

What I hate most about her is her pretense at being this professional, deferential woman when she’s acting like a PITA! I detest that level of passive aggression. She keeps saying I don’t understand and I’m confused etc and asks for things to be repeated, IMO, just to be controlling. [For example, she told the judge she has no storage space in her cell or whatever so she knows he can’t just give her 2 boxes of files to keep with her for review. The jail won’t allow that anyway. Yet she keeps raising this even though all the files have been copied on the usb drive, which she was provided.] Everyone is speaking in plain English. And I agree she lies as well. She is testing the judge’s patience! They all know what’s coming if this goes to trial! That’s why the judge added an extra week. She will do this constantly and delay delay delay and jury will be in and out every 30 mins as she pretends to be “confused.”

Let’s remember that she wanted her lawyers to do unethical things. She wanted to focus on things that are not legally sufficient. This is her only way to have some control on her situation and she’s not gonna give it up.

There’s no getting out of this no matter what she does. She will pay the piper in the end. Just like Darryl Brooks. JMO

BBM. Bingo. She wants to run the show. She gets a kick out of making those in authority cater to her. So gross.

I wonder what unethical things she wanted her lawyers to do.

 

[gitana1]

Boone should be given a basic manual of trial procedures, it seems to me.

The defense (her) and prosecution attorneys cannot just ask anything of a witness, the door must be opened according to court protocol. Then there is the opening and closing statements to instruct her on.

She will need to get a grip on the objections she can make to the prosecutor's questions.

The judge can tell her if she needs to come up for a side bar and sometimes the judge will have the jury leave the room for this and for other various important reasons.

In the Alec Baldwin trial the judge sent the jury out so she could have a Brady doctrine hearing about the exculpatory evidence that was left out....causing the case to be dismissed with prejudice.

Is Boone's interrogation on police body camera admissible along with some or all of her interrogation at the police station?

What about subpoenas? Is she filing her own? I read she may use a domestic violence defense.
A court investigator has some depositions he needs to give to her at the jail.

This case, serious 2nd degree murder screams out for legal counsel.

And how does she take the stand and question herself? She likely will have very important points she will want to make clear to the jury, all under oath, but then the prosecution can cross examine her while she is still on the stand under oath.

This trial will have grieving family in the gallery who sre counting on justice for their beloved son, brother, grandson, cousin, friend, nephew and father to his girls.....JorgeTorres. I am guessing on the exact family dynamics but the family dynamics are very real.

Sarah will finally not be able to make it all about her vain fake hysterics, playing victim, constant bragging that she is excelling in life and motherhood, and that leaving Jorge Torres to smother to death was always unintentional.

So I gotta count on the judge, that he will keep Sarah under firm control. That the judge will keep her in her place as the defendant of a heinous crime and not the fake innocent she is espousing to be.

2 Cent exhaustion.

I like the judge. I think he’s fair, no nonsense and super calm.

Her interrogation should be admissible.

The court can’t give her any cheat sheets. Nothing. The judge can’t instruct her as to the law. She’s on her own.

 

[gitana1]

Initially, I was under the impression that SB would be assisted with some sort of a duty court lawyer(s) who would work on behalf of the court in a legal capacity to mediate between herself and the judge / jury and prosecution. Like a legal clerk on the days of court. However, that's not the case.

SB is now fully loaded with the onus of representing herself, including how she interacts with all other parties in court and with no legal guidance whatsoever. She has her own Private Investigator, paid for by the state and that's it. This is why the judge has given an extra week (raised from two weeks to three weeks) court sitting time.

Apparently, she's not the first defendant to be in this position.

JMO but the judge has been exceptionally considerate and clear with her so that she cannot claim an unfair trial.

Here is an interesting law review article that lays out how forfeiture or waiver by conduct can occur. Good info., for anyone who is interested in knowing more. I certainly was.

https://open.mitchellhamline.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1394&context=wmlr#:~:text=Jones%20decision%20is%20that%20forfeiture,by%20conduct”%20and%20“forfeiture”

 

[gitana1]

Have y’all seen how Darryl Brooks has been behaving since his outlandish performance at his trial? So well behaved. He’s a completely diff person now. He took a plea on the outstanding charges he had involving his ex. I only bring this up as a demonstration that the defendants who do this are doing it deliberately to frustrate the process and gain control. It’s all about control! SB is so smug and pleased with herself that all these ppl have to sit there under her control because they are bound by law to give her a fair trial. She gets to be bridezilla until she’s convicted.

JMO

Very good point. He was totally insane at trial. Now he acts meek and mild.

 

[Cool Cats]

I like the judge. I think he’s fair, no nonsense and super calm.

Her interrogation should be admissible.

The court can’t give her any cheat sheets. Nothing. The judge can’t instruct her as to the law. She’s on her own.

Thanks, and as I said I hope you will post about her trial when she has her trial.

Again, very nice to have a verified attorney on this thread.