Grand Jury Indictment 3/20/14

[justonedrin]

If I was in jail, held with out bond,while my 3 juvenile children were growing up without me, whether I was male or female, in a case that I was completely innocent, I would DEMAND a lie detector test, PRONTO.--give me my get out of jail free card. In fact I would have done this waaaaay before arrest warrants were ever even drawn up.

regardless if Lie Detector tests are admitted in court or not, they go a looooong way towards proving innocence to detectives. you know--the ones who draft those affidavits and arrest warrant thingys.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

If I was in jail, held with out bond,while my 3 juvenile children were growing up without me, whether I was male or female, in a case that I was completely innocent, I would DEMAND a lie detector test, PRONTO.--give me my get out of jail free card. In fact I would have done this waaaaay before arrest warrants were ever even drawn up.

regardless if Lie Detector tests are admitted in court or not, they go a looooong way towards proving innocence to detectives. you know--the ones who draft those affidavits and arrest warrant thingys.

A lie detector pass is not going to make a difference, if LE has enough evidence to charge someone w/ murder w/ no body. Definitely not a get out of jail free pass.

 

[justonedrin]

A lie detector pass is not going to make a difference, if LE has enough evidence to charge someone w/ murder w/ no body. Definitely not a get out of jail free pass.

you must of missed the part about IF being INNOCENT of the charges and demanding the LD test.

so let me reiterate--If Im being held on murder charges--and Im innocent--I am going to demand a LD test to clear me--if that doesnt do it after I PASS the LD test --Im calling Barry Scheck and Allen Dershowitz and The Innocence Project pronto to get me out and back to my kids. Neither of the M's have done this.
Follow me now?

 

[cluciano63]

you must of missed the part about IF being INNOCENT of the charges and demanding the LD test.

so let me reiterate--If Im being held on murder charges--and Im innocent--I am going to demand a LD test to clear me--if that doesnt do it after I PASS the LD test --Im calling Barry Scheck and Allen Dershowitz and The Innocence Project pronto to get me out and back to my kids. Neither of the M's have done this.
Follow me now?

But if it got to the point of charges being brought...none of that would matter, or happen, until maybe after a conviction. Police use an LD test to rule people out, if they can. They are not going to bother if they have solid evidence,enough to convince a grand jury. TM could be hollering away in her cell all day, Imo, but no one is listening right now. She has to go through a trial first. Nothing is going to het her out of there sooner (if ever) other than someone else confessing and new evidence backing it up. Jmo

 

[CarmonCayman]

Your not getting what justonedrin is saying. he/she is saying if they were innocent they would have done that immediately after the disappearance. I don't think they are saying they should take one now. The absence of initially taking one leads to suspicion.

That bring said I don't know if they did or did not take one. Just thinking I get what the poster was saying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NFYIAMY]

Do you think the defense lawyers will revisit bail for the two if going to trial takes that long?

There was talk of bail being revisited in the future at the initial bond hearing.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

you must of missed the part about IF being INNOCENT of the charges and demanding the LD test.

so let me reiterate--If Im being held on murder charges--and Im innocent--I am going to demand a LD test to clear me--if that doesnt do it after I PASS the LD test --Im calling Barry Scheck and Allen Dershowitz and The Innocence Project pronto to get me out and back to my kids. Neither of the M's have done this.
Follow me now?

A lie detector pass does not get one released if LE believes they have enough evidence for an arrest.

Also, The Innocence Project works on helping people who have been convicted, not just charged. The two men you mentioned, have thousands of requests for help. They don't just sprinkle some fairy dust, and get one released from custody because they passed a lie detector. Why do you think the people we see released from Death Row are there for decades?

ETA: Their website says they use DNA testing to get one released.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Your not getting what justonedrin is saying. he/she is saying if they were innocent they would have done that immediately after the disappearance. I don't think they are saying they should take one now. The absence of initially taking one leads to suspicion.

That bring said I don't know if they did or did not take one. Just thinking I get what the poster was saying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But their post says:

"If Im being held on murder charges--and Im innocent--I am going to demand a LD test to clear me-"

 

[Oreolover]

Lie detector tests are inadmissible for a reason: they are inherently unreliable. The truth is most tests are biased against the innocent, who will be upset and anxious to prove innocence. The test looks for anxiousness and nervousness, and reads that as "lying or untruthful." In the roughly 90 years that the lie detector test has been in existence, there have been only a few scientific reports that indicate it is an accurate and credible test for truthfulness (and most of those have been sponsored by the Association that supports lie detector tests).

A defendant has no "right" to a lie detector test, so a demand can be made, but it will do little good. The defendant would have a right to obtain and pay for their own test, but those results would be suspect since the defendant paid for them.

Occasionally, LE uses them to exclude people under suspicion, but most often it is a fishing expedition. LE will tell the person, "you failed" even if they did not in an effort to obtain information. Once the charges are issued, having a lie detector test is of little value.

Also, it is generally thought that sociopaths and psychopaths are much more able to control their responses on a lie detector, thus resulting in a false reporting.

 

[Hatfield]

Lie detector tests are inadmissible for a reason: they are inherently unreliable. The truth is most tests are biased against the innocent, who will be upset and anxious to prove innocence. The test looks for anxiousness and nervousness, and reads that as "lying or untruthful." In the roughly 90 years that the lie detector test has been in existence, there have been only a few scientific reports that indicate it is an accurate and credible test for truthfulness (and most of those have been sponsored by the Association that supports lie detector tests).

A defendant has no "right" to a lie detector test, so a demand can be made, but it will do little good. The defendant would have a right to obtain and pay for their own test, but those results would be suspect since the defendant paid for them.

Occasionally, LE uses them to exclude people under suspicion, but most often it is a fishing expedition. LE will tell the person, "you failed" even if they did not in an effort to obtain information. Once the charges are issued, having a lie detector test is of little value.

Also, it is generally thought that sociopaths and psychopaths are much more able to control their responses on a lie detector, thus resulting in a false reporting.

Me and significant other just had a discussion last night about lie detector tests. Our conclusion was to never agree to take one ever under any circumstance. Since it cannot be used as proof of anything it seemed to us that more bad than good will happen.

Someone interpreting results is open for interpretation and that is not something either would want no matter what the situation.

 

[CarmonCayman]

But their post says:



"If Im being held on murder charges--and Im innocent--I am going to demand a LD test to clear me-"

Yes you are correct. I think their point is though that someone innocent would want one so they can hold it up in their own defense and would do everything they could every moment of the day to try to prove their innocence. I'm in no way saying that TM and SM are not doing everything they can every moment of the day to prove their innocence and I doubt we would know if they were.

If I were charged with murder and new I was innocent I would NOT want a LDT since they are not reliable and that could backfire on me. JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

Ostensibly LE would not charge someone with murder without evidence linking them to that murder. Now, we know it can happen (and certainly has happened in the past), but if the M's were actually innocent, LE would not have:

- Seen their Ford F150 truck on video heading towards PTL in 2 spots. Remember LE got hits for 82 of the same vehicle in the county and checked out in person 81 of them. Once they were able to eliminate the 81, they then got a search warrant for that 82nd one...i.e. the M's truck.

- Found something in that truck to link them to Heather. (Like DNA)

- Found evidence (whatever it is) at the M's home that corroborates them being involved (again, we don't know what this is).

So, based on all that and more, they would not have been charged because there wouldn't be any physical evidence or digital evidence linking to them.

Sure, they could each have offered to take a LDT, but even if they passed it with flying colors, IF evidence was found linking them to the crime they still would have been arrested.

And on the flip side, IF they had offered to take and then flunked a LDT, without evidence they would not have been arrested. Still in the crosshairs, sure, but charged with murder? Not without evidence. IMO.

 

[intothedeep]

February 22, 2014 Myrtle Beach Attorney Greg McCollum was outside the J. Reuben Long Detention Center Saturday afternoon, and said he was requested by the public defender’s office to meet with Tammy Moorer, but not necessarily as a public defender.

“I’m here to talk to Tammy,” McCollum said.

Read more here: http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/20...held-on-bond-in-exposure.html#storylink=cpy14

February 24, 2014 On Monday, Tammy Moorer was represented by Florence-based attorney Patrick McLaughlin

Read more here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.c....html+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us#storylink=cpy

Posted: Monday, March 17, 2014 3:35 pm | Updated: 4:04 pm, Tue Mar 18, 2014. Tammy Moorer’s attorney Greg McCollum

http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/article_588cb81e-ae0b-11e3-86e2-0017a43b2370.html


Guess she can't make up her mind...

This was my understanding...
Tammy is with Greg McCollum, the MB/Conway local attorney who was originally assigned on February 22nd by the Solicitor's office.

In the days immediately following the initial arrest, McCollum said he did not know if he would continue to represent TM moving forward as there were talks of a private Florence based attorney the Moorer family was familiar with.

Sidney had a court appointed attorney in the beginning. The next thing I saw was McCullom still representing Tammy and Sidney with Kirk Truslow.

Does anyone else remember if Truslow was mentioned early on as possibly representing Tammy? Maybe I dreamed that.

So, why are the M's paying for a private attorney for Sidney only? And what could this mean as far as the Moorer's mindset--if it means anything at all.

How would it work if the Caisson family is helping pay legal fees and Sidney's defense paints Tammy as the primary instigator/perpetrator of this crime?

 

[Surfside]

This was my understanding...
Tammy is with Greg McCollum, the MB/Conway local attorney who was originally assigned on February 22nd by the Solicitor's office.

In the days immediately following the initial arrest, McCollum said he did not know if he would continue to represent TM moving forward as there were talks of a private Florence based attorney the Moorer family was familiar with.

Sidney had a court appointed attorney in the beginning. The next thing I saw was McCullom still representing Tammy and Sidney with Kirk Truslow.

Does anyone else remember if Truslow was mentioned early on as possibly representing Tammy? Maybe I dreamed that.

So, why are the M's paying for a private attorney for Sidney only? And what could this mean as far as the Moorer's mindset--if it means anything at all.

How would it work if the Caisson family is helping pay legal fees and Sidney's defense paints Tammy as the primary instigator/perpetrator of this crime?

So, Truslow was NOT the court appointed attorney? And do we KNOW that the (Summerville) Mooreres are paying for Sidney's legal representation? If that's the case, maybe his folks think he's a victim in all of this, and don't care for their daughter-in-law. That would certainly lend plausibility to Tammy's online rants about her in-laws. JMO.

 

[Madeleine74]

We don't know anything about how monies are being used by the M's family for any part of this case, privately-retained lawyers, etc. Nor will we unless they decide to make that information publicly known.

 

[Surfside]

We don't know anything about how monies are being used by the M's family for any part of this case, privately-retained lawyers, etc. Nor will we unless they decide to make that information publicly known.

I didn't think so. I was wondering where that train of thought came from. Madeleine, do you know if Truslow was the original court appointed attorney?

 

[ISWMLE]

Regarding attorneys, Tammy had a different attorney in the very beginning. Sidney has had the same court appointed attorney.

"During the bond hearings, no attorneys were present. At around 3 p.m., attorney Greg McCollum showed up at J. Reuben Long Detention Center and explained because of the nature of this case and how fast it is moving this weekend, the chief public defender called him in to talk to Tammy Moorer.

"The most cautious approach to take is separate lawyers," McCollum said. He explains attorney Kirk Truslow is talking to Sidney Moorer. While this is the first time he is sitting down with Tammy, McCollum anticipates defending her throughout this case, even if more charges are handed down" -BBM

http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/24785...ection-with-heather-elvis-case-police-confirm

 

[Madeleine74]

I have no idea where some of the things are coming from that get posted. I know nothing about which attorneys were talked to or hired in this case. I haven't paid any attention to that.

 

[Starling]

When is the next court date? Anyone?

 

[Coffeelover]

Can someone please outline what's next in this case? I'm not very legally savvy. They didn't get out on a bond so they have to wait in jail until their trials. Just wondering how long this typically might take?