Halyna Hutchins Shot With Prop Gun - Alec Baldwin indicted & Hannah Gutierrez-Reed charged, 2021 #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

It seems like Morrissey didn’t turn over certain reports in a timely manner to the defense in the HGR trial. *sigh* Bowels is now gunning to get his client out. The Teske issue that sprung AB is not going to help HGR but apparently there were a couple reports that Morrissey failed to turn over.

HGR is absolutely guilty and needs to do her full time. If HGR’s conviction gets overturned, Morrissey should be shamed out of the legal profession! It’s disgraceful that she could’ve been so careless.

JMO
 
Weki said:
It seems like Morrissey didn’t turn over certain reports in a timely manner to the defense in the HGR trial. *sigh* Bowels is now gunning to get his client out. The Teske issue that sprung AB is not going to help HGR but apparently there were a couple reports that Morrissey failed to turn over.

HGR is absolutely guilty and needs to do her full time. If HGR’s conviction gets overturned, Morrissey should be shamed out of the legal profession! It’s disgraceful that she could’ve been so careless.

JMO
Click to expand...
On principle I don't see why it shouldn't help her case.

The existence of the ammo from TT really had no bearing on AB's case when you think about it because the jury only had to make a decision as to his actions. The source of the ammo is fairly irrelevant.

AB's case was dismissed because his attorneys never had the chance to examine the evidence to decide for themselves whether or not it may be significant or whether it might change how they present his defence. Moreover, they intentionally hid it under a different file number in order to hide it.

I don't see how those facts can't apply to HGR's case as well. True, the police didn't have it until after the case (it was actually during jury deliberations they got it, I think), but they knew about it months before hand and made a conscious decision not to go get it.

Refusing to accept it is, imo, just as egregious as not turning it over because it's an attempt to do exactly the same thing - hide it.

Don't get me wrong, I think she's guilty and should do the full sentence but the courts cannot be inconsistent here.
 
Weki said:
It seems like Morrissey didn’t turn over certain reports in a timely manner to the defense in the HGR trial. *sigh* Bowels is now gunning to get his client out. The Teske issue that sprung AB is not going to help HGR but apparently there were a couple reports that Morrissey failed to turn over.

HGR is absolutely guilty and needs to do her full time. If HGR’s conviction gets overturned, Morrissey should be shamed out of the legal profession! It’s disgraceful that she could’ve been so careless.

JMO
Click to expand...
(Bolded by me)

There's been enough of a pattern here that I don't think it's just carelessness. It's not just these two reports or the Teske ammo. There's also a history of discovery violations with both HGR and AB that the courts dealt with pre-trial. Because those were uncovered before the trial could begin, there were other remedies that the court could give the defense.

I think Morrissey made a strategic choice to make things as difficult for the defense as possible. I believe she was trying every trick in the book to secure convictions and if she withheld a few things to give herself an advantage, then she'd do so without compunction. The issue is that prosecutors have ethical obligations to give the defendant a fair trial and not just to win at all costs. I do wonder if that's why her first co-prosecutor left. On the stand Morrissey claimed that Jason Lewis dropped off because of other obligations, but I believe that was a smokescreen. It would be interesting to hear his side of things.

I do agree it's a shame, because Morrissey had a very strong case against HGR and didn't need to pull these shenanigans.
 
ch_13 said:
(Bolded by me)

There's been enough of a pattern here that I don't think it's just carelessness. It's not just these two reports or the Teske ammo. There's also a history of discovery violations with both HGR and AB that the courts dealt with pre-trial. Because those were uncovered before the trial could begin, there were other remedies that the court could give the defense.

I think Morrissey made a strategic choice to make things as difficult for the defense as possible. I believe she was trying every trick in the book to secure convictions and if she withheld a few things to give herself an advantage, then she'd do so without compunction. The issue is that prosecutors have ethical obligations to give the defendant a fair trial and not just to win at all costs. I do wonder if that's why her first co-prosecutor left. On the stand Morrissey claimed that Jason Lewis dropped off because of other obligations, but I believe that was a smokescreen. It would be interesting to hear his side of things.

I do agree it's a shame, because Morrissey had a very strong case against HGR and didn't need to pull these shenanigans.
Click to expand...
I agree here. These trials have been a farce from beginning to end, quite honestly.

The co-prosecutor left essentially because she actually has what Morrisey is lacking - ethics, integrity and honesty - and dumped things as soon as the situation with the ammo came to light.
 
s
Marantz4250b said:
I agree here. These trials have been a farce from beginning to end, quite honestly.

The co-prosecutor left essentially because she actually has what Morrisey is lacking - ethics, integrity and honesty - and dumped things as soon as the situation with the ammo came to light.
Click to expand...
That's why Erlinda Johnson left, who was the co-prosecutor for AB.

I was actually talking about Jason Lewis, who co-prosecuted HGR. He resigned in the lead-up to AB's trial. There were reports of infighting between the two and his leaving was handled in a very odd way, no press release and Morrissey at first refusing to comment. I wonder if his story will ever come out.
 
Morrissey just can't stop digging a hole for herself.

Here's a statement she makes in a recent motion in the HGR case...
Undersigned counsel is still struggling to understand how ammunition that was never in the possession of, seen by or known to any witness being called to the trial and was turned over two and a half years after the death of Ms. Hutchins created a discovery violation that justified a dismissal with prejudice of Mr. Baldwin's case.

And later she says...
Although the Court's final order has not yet been filed, undersigned counsel contends that the Court misunderstood the testimony on July 12, 2024, and improperly dismissed the case against Mr. Baldwin.

I can't believe she is claiming that there was no discovery violation for Baldwin. That is just nuts. In fact the whole motion is wild. It is 34 pages of Morrissey listing her grievances against the judge, her co-prosecutor, and all the defense lawyers for both Baldwin and HGR. She even goes into detail on the plea negotiations and motions that were filed under seal. (Normally, motions can't exceed 10 pages. She went over by 2 1/2 times to get in all her score-settling.)

What exactly is Morrissey trying to do? She knows that the person who will be reading this motion is the very judge who dismissed the Baldwin case. I've been saying since even before the HGR trial started that the giant chip on her shoulder is a huge liability for a prosecutor. She got away with her bullying behavior against Bowles, but it came back to bite her in the butt when she was faced with defense attorneys who had the ability and resources to fight back.
 
Morrissey is going with the scorched earth approach I see. Lol. I have to admire the guts to tell a judge her dismissal was unwarranted and made based on a misunderstanding of the evidence. I think Morrissey believes what she’s saying. She sees Teske and Thell as attempting to defraud the state by supplying that ammo at such a late hour. I can’t disagree with that. It’s shady on their part. She’s arrogant but I’m not sure she was intentionally hiding this evidence. She messed up big time on this and unraveled in court. It’s very interesting that the judge told them before lunch she would be dismissing the case. Hence the celebration we heard about in the hallways. I think Morrissey was aggrieved by that. She’s def throwing the court under the bus by revealing that in a public filing. Morrissey may get in trouble for revealing information about sealed documents. JMO
 
Weki said:
It’s very interesting that the judge told them before lunch she would be dismissing the case. Hence the celebration we heard about in the hallways.
Click to expand...
Hmmmmm......that puts a slightly different slant on AB's emotional state when the judge was reading the dismissal. Well acted, Sir!
 
Weki said:
She sees Teske and Thell as attempting to defraud the state by supplying that ammo at such a late hour. I can’t disagree with that. It’s shady on their part.
Click to expand...
rsbm.

I know that's the state's version of events, but I don't believe it's in accord with the facts. The prosecutors knew about the cache of ammo at Teske's home since shortly after the shooting. And when Morrissey was put on the case, she actually had a pre-trial interview with Teske where they discussed the ammo and she told him that the police would come by and pick it up. She changed her mind later, and apparently never bothered to tell him. So Teske was holding onto the ammo waiting for someone to come by and no one ever did. That's why he ended up dropping off the ammo with the state police when he was in Santa Fe.

I mean people keep saying this was some plot of Thelle Reed. But if that was his intention, why wait until the trial was practically over before turning over the ammo? (They were doing closing arguments at that time.) If it was some hail mary attempt to help HGR, wouldn't Teske have turned it over prior to the trial? It does no good once the trial is concluded. In all likelihood the ammo on its own doesn't meet the standard for a new trial, and even if it did, by the time they go through the legal process, Hannah will have finished her 18-month sentence.
 
Weki said:
Morrissey is going with the scorched earth approach I see. Lol. I have to admire the guts to tell a judge her dismissal was unwarranted and made based on a misunderstanding of the evidence. I think Morrissey believes what she’s saying. She sees Teske and Thell as attempting to defraud the state by supplying that ammo at such a late hour. I can’t disagree with that. It’s shady on their part. She’s arrogant but I’m not sure she was intentionally hiding this evidence. She messed up big time on this and unraveled in court. It’s very interesting that the judge told them before lunch she would be dismissing the case. Hence the celebration we heard about in the hallways. I think Morrissey was aggrieved by that. She’s def throwing the court under the bus by revealing that in a public filing. Morrissey may get in trouble for revealing information about sealed documents. JMO
Click to expand...
To me, if Morrissey thought if fishy the way Teske was producing this, all the more reason to make sure it is disclosed. She herself said she thought it was irrelevant anyway, why not disclose it. By NOT disclosing it, she MADE it relevant.

As for if the Judge said she was dismiss it before the break, I take that with a grain of salt. She may have indicated she was likely to do that, but that isn't binding. I have had judges say something similar and then come back and say that after reviewing something they are instead going to hold off. But by trying to throw the judge under the bus, she just hurts her own credibility. I don't think that motion is really meant for the Court to truly reconsider, the intended audience is the Bar Association misconduct panel she thinks maybe in her future.
 
PrairieWind said:
To me, if Morrissey thought if fishy the way Teske was producing this, all the more reason to make sure it is disclosed. She herself said she thought it was irrelevant anyway, why not disclose it. By NOT disclosing it, she MADE it relevant.

As for if the Judge said she was dismiss it before the break, I take that with a grain of salt. She may have indicated she was likely to do that, but that isn't binding. I have had judges say something similar and then come back and say that after reviewing something they are instead going to hold off. But by trying to throw the judge under the bus, she just hurts her own credibility. I don't think that motion is really meant for the Court to truly reconsider, the intended audience is the Bar Association misconduct panel she thinks maybe in her future.
Click to expand...
She knew Bowels had the evidence and didn’t put Teske up or introduce the ammo into evidence. We also have to remember that Teske came to the Sheriff’s office with the ammo AfTeR Hannah’s trial was over. This further confirms in her mind this ammo is not relevant to the Rust case. I think she dismissed it in her mind. I doubt she even read the report written by the detective. As far as she knew it was just the 4 bullets in the pic that were shown to her by Bowels.

I don’t see anything nefarious. I think the simplest explanation is she was arrogant and she’s not a career prosecutor and was careless with her obligations. Im not excusing any of that but I think it’s human for her to want to defend herself against any bad faith arguments. I also feel like the fact that she offered misdemeanor plea deals to both defendants undercuts the defense arguments that she’s “out to get” anybody.

It was obvious the judge was gonna dismiss the case before lunch/before arguments as defense (AB, his wife, and Spiro) was seen hugging and smiling in the hallways right after they broke for lunch - it was reported by several ppl there. Spiro was there when judge said that off the record and saw the judge’s mood so he would’ve been able to assess accordingly as an experienced trial lawyer & wouldn’t give false hope to his client.

JMO
 
Last edited:
Marantz4250b said:
Hmmmmm......that puts a slightly different slant on AB's emotional state when the judge was reading the dismissal. Well acted, Sir!
Click to expand...
Where was the story about the judge telling them during lunch break that she was going to dismiss the case? I missed that story, don’t recall reading it.
 
PrairieWind said:
To me, if Morrissey thought if fishy the way Teske was producing this, all the more reason to make sure it is disclosed. She herself said she thought it was irrelevant anyway, why not disclose it. By NOT disclosing it, she MADE it relevant.

As for if the Judge said she was dismiss it before the break, I take that with a grain of salt. She may have indicated she was likely to do that, but that isn't binding. I have had judges say something similar and then come back and say that after reviewing something they are instead going to hold off. But by trying to throw the judge under the bus, she just hurts her own credibility. I don't think that motion is really meant for the Court to truly reconsider, the intended audience is the Bar Association misconduct panel she thinks maybe in her future.
Click to expand...
Thanks for explaining that. I can easily see how Morrissey might have been suspicious of that evidence at first, but wondered if there wasn’t a better way to handle it. Hiding it was the worst option.
 
Betty P said:
Where was the story about the judge telling them during lunch break that she was going to dismiss the case? I missed that story, don’t recall reading it.
Click to expand...

It's mentioned by Morrissey in her recent state's response. I thought it was obvious as soon as the judge was going through the bullets that she was going to dismiss, it was just a matter of technical procedure from then on for the record.

I'm not sure where to link the motions but Emily Baker on YouTube has been covering them. They're quite funny to read - Morrissey's tone is very very snarky!
 
katykat said:
It's mentioned by Morrissey in her recent state's response. I thought it was obvious as soon as the judge was going through the bullets that she was going to dismiss, it was just a matter of technical procedure from then on for the record.

I'm not sure where to link the motions but Emily Baker on YouTube has been covering them. They're quite funny to read - Morrissey's tone is very very snarky!
Click to expand...

Not sure I believe Morrissey. I don't think the defense at AB's trial was at all assured of a dismissal until the judge announced it. No doubt they were hoping she would. JMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 86 more.
Total: 2,744 (members: 87, guests: 2,657)

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
2,657
Total visitors
2,744
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,015
Messages
18,150,337
Members
231,614
Latest member
katgneal
Back
Top