Holly Bobo found deceased, discussion thread *Arrests* #6

[SteveS]

Pearl, as I recall, it was in mid-to-late August, and I think that MP was the defendant. But I wouldn't want to wade through all the threads to find it, and sure don't expect anyone else to do it either!! lol (It's not that important to know. We all recall it was a mess.)

ETA - It was NOT Stowe's fault. Here's the link http://www.jacksonsun.com/story/new...ily-feels-neglected-knowing-hearing/14269357/

Stowe was elected Aug 7, and took office on Sep 1. The hearing in question (re MP) was on Aug 18.

 

[Tugela]

My impression is that there were prosecutorial issues with this case even before Stowe went into office. SA's immunity deal, the accused people not being brought to court when they were supposed to be there, and the Pearcy fiasco are just a few of those issues. Stowe entered the picture officially in September. He could have inherited a veritable mess. The case could be so unorganized that he is still familiarizing himself with the "voluminous" evidence. If so, IMO, he should have gone to the judge and defense attorneys with such a problem. The route taken should not have been to simply miss deadlines. I'm thinking that one of two things has happened.
One is what SteveS posted above. Stowe has bitten off more than he could chew, or he doesn't play well with others. The other thing is that there is a real problem with some of the evidence or lack thereof. It pains me to even type that there might be evidence problems because I am usually a strong supporter of LE. To me, there is just something odd about the whole thing from Holly's abduction through today. My mention of the two DAs exiting the case leads me to believe the problem may not be with the DAs office. If the case is so bungled, I would not want to be involved in it as a prosecutor. I have never hear of another case where the investigating agency and the prosecution would not or could not work together. The sad thing is that justice for Holly hangs in the balance. When will the dismissal issue or the naming of a special prosecutor happen?

I think that even if there were differences between the various DAs and LE, it is quite stunning that they blew up so publically. I can't think of any instance where such a thing has happened before. To me that indicates that it is not simply about personality or not being up to the job (which is an irrelevant argument anyway, since the DAs office has a staff, and presumably they would be on top of things even if their boss was not). I think the problem is with the evidence itself, and how the investigators have conducted themselves. IMO that is what the argument was really about, and potentially the reason discovery has not been done yet.

 

[clarabelle]

<BBM for Focus>
Imo, the lack of leadership and performance was obvious in the TBI's marathon investigation of the tragic Holly Bobo abduction/murder from day one; 04/13/2011.. The blunders by Director Mark Gwyn, investigators of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, and the ousted District Attorney General Hansel McCadams, continued to mount throughout the past 3.5 years and are way too numerous to list on one thread..

Imo, District Attorney General Stowe is faced with cleaning up decades of corruption, malfeasance, and many other types of failure to discharge public obligations existing by common law, custom, or statute..jmo

Can you say TN; Meth Capitol of the USA in 2010, Decatur County; TN's meth capitol, DA's helicopter rides to football games, BMWs, ATVs, personal drug use of confiscated evidence, and possibly drug dealing by prior DA employees, etc., etc...

Your comment deserves so much more than a simple thank you. I completely agree that the TBIs performance in this investigation was way less than stellar and at times even bungling. I hope Holly gets Justice

 

[maskedwoman]

IMO this is not a TBI issue. I am not from Tennessee, but if their system is parallel to where I live (Texas), then TBI's role is to assist in things like investigation and testing and so on. But the work of filing documents, meeting deadlines, building and prosecuting the case - - all of those are the job of the prosecutor, not TBI. And it's those areas - which are Stowe's responsibility - where the case is apparently being jeopardized.

You are correct, Steve. That's how it works. They provide expertise when requested, and help coordinate and/or prevent wee-wee contests when cases cross county lines. They have first line responsibility for things like major drug cases, public corruption, fugitives, official misconduct, organized crime, illegal gambling, Medicaid provider fraud, patient abuse, social security administration fraud, cyber crime, domestic terrorism, etc.

Frankly, since their role in this case should be supportive, I have wondered more than once why they have apparently been driving the wagon. Maybe the previous Sheriff asked them to (I'm thinking he did), or maybe he was clearly not up to the task and TBI were just kind enough not to call him incompetent to his face in public. Or maybe they suspected/got a tip/etc that someone in the local Sheriff's office was "overlooking" some things because of a personal relationship or corruption. We were told early on that Granddaddy was a big deal and that protected them to some degree. Of course, it could also be as simple as someone at TBI thinking this case might be a great career maker and deciding to muscle in and take over.

The TBI has frequently been accused of being secretive but I don't recall them being accused of screwing up a case by not getting the forensics done in a timely fashion. Granted, I don't keep a file on them or anything, but I do think I would remember if cases had been messed up or dismissed due to incompetence from the TBI. I googled for any articles critical of the TBI and only found one from 2003. The Director at that time was widely criticized by judges, former directors, and active duty agents for disbanding their public integrity unit and being corrupt himself. That guy left shortly afterward and Gwynn replaced him in 2004.

It would be ironic if TBI forensics screwed up this case, since Gwynn was Asst Director in charge of the TBI's labs before becoming Director. Still, at the end of the day, it's Stowe's butt on the line in court. Why produce NOTHING at all, and risk contempt charges, sanctions and who knows what all if the TBI hasn't performed?

If I were Stowe, I would have told Gwynn, "Look, we appreciate all the help, but this case is going down and both our careers with it if the forensics don't get done. So you better get that lab running another shift or, at the next court deadline, I'm gonna have to throw you guys under the bus". And then do it. That might actually have been a career maker for Stowe. He could have been the Buford Pusser of Tennessee DA's. Instead, he apparently threw a hissy fit that made him look unprofessional at worst, or highly strung at best, and had to step aside.

 

[SteveS]

You are correct, Steve. That's how it works. They provide expertise when requested, and help coordinate and/or prevent wee-wee contests when cases cross county lines. They have first line responsibility for things like major drug cases, public corruption, fugitives, official misconduct, organized crime, illegal gambling, Medicaid provider fraud, patient abuse, social security administration fraud, cyber crime, domestic terrorism, etc.

Frankly, since their role in this case should be supportive, I have wondered more than once why they have apparently been driving the wagon. Maybe the previous Sheriff asked them to (I'm thinking he did), or maybe he was clearly not up to the task and TBI were just kind enough not to call him incompetent to his face in public. Or maybe they suspected/got a tip/etc that someone in the local Sheriff's office was "overlooking" some things because of a personal relationship or corruption. We were told early on that Granddaddy was a big deal and that protected them to some degree. Of course, it could also be as simple as someone at TBI thinking this case might be a great career maker and deciding to muscle in and take over.

The TBI has frequently been accused of being secretive but I don't recall them being accused of screwing up a case by not getting the forensics done in a timely fashion. Granted, I don't keep a file on them or anything, but I do think I would remember if cases had been messed up or dismissed due to incompetence from the TBI. I googled for any articles critical of the TBI and only found one from 2003. The Director at that time was widely criticized by judges, former directors, and active duty agents for disbanding their public integrity unit and being corrupt himself. That guy left shortly afterward and Gwynn replaced him in 2004.

It would be ironic if TBI forensics screwed up this case, since Gwynn was Asst Director in charge of the TBI's labs before becoming Director. Still, at the end of the day, it's Stowe's butt on the line in court. Why produce NOTHING at all, and risk contempt charges, sanctions and who knows what all if the TBI hasn't performed?

If I were Stowe, I would have told Gwynn, "Look, we appreciate all the help, but this case is going down and both our careers with it if the forensics don't get done. So you better get that lab running another shift or, at the next court deadline, I'm gonna have to throw you guys under the bus". And then do it. That might actually have been a career maker for Stowe. He could have been the Buford Pusser of Tennessee DA's. Instead, he apparently threw a hissy fit that made him look unprofessional at worst, or highly strung at best, and had to step aside.

All of this makes lots of sense to me. I have followed this case for some time, but was not aware that TBI was the entity that was handling the case, to the exclusion of the county LE or the DA's office, and hadn't understood why some here have been trying to paint them as the bad apple in the barrel, and absolve others. Now I know. Thanks.

At the same time, as you note, that still doesn't explain or excuse why Stowe hasn't followed through on the legal details in this case, under his control, since he has taken office. And my thinking is that since he took office on a platform of getting justice for Holly (the high profile case), he's certainly not doing what it takes to follow through on that. That is inexcusable imo. Getting the cases dropped is not Justice for Holly.

 

[jggordo]

I could be mistaken, but for years the locals have complained of the "good ole boy" attitude and conduct when coming to criminal activity by some. At the same time saying they suspect it goes possibly higher than the County level. I believe part of this has to do with a new and current regime of a DA and Sheriff, at the least in this County. Local voters showed that at the polls. They no longer trusted the "good ole boys". The TBI Director serves at the Governor's appointment, and that appointment is being upheld by him without waiver or investigation, IMO. Stowe did not reveal the word "misconduct" used but the Director did IIRC. So the real "hissy fit" in the media that caused unknown damage, was done by the TBI, not Stowe. Stowe has seen something(s) in the case, or lack thereof that raised the hair on the back of his neck which caused at least a pause. I believe he has recused himself from the case because of it. He apparently wants no part of what he sees as problems with the investigation.

JMO's

 

[SteveS]

Stowe has seen something(s) in the case, or lack thereof that raised the hair on the back of his neck which caused at least a pause. I believe he has recused himself from the case because of it. He apparently wants no part of what he sees as problems with the investigation.

JMO's

I'm not sure that I buy this ...but for the moment, I'll respond based on the assumption that what you say is true.

In that event, I still have a HUGE problem with Stowe. Because, while he is giving lip service to making things right, his solution of walking away from the problem doesn't accomplish anything for justice.

In that scenario, he's abandoned a quest for justice, and prioritized his own reputation just in case there's a loss at trial, which is a prima donna attitude. If he claims he is the only one that cares about Justice for Holly, but then leaves the case to be handled by those who don't care, what does that say about him and his priorities? I have a real problem with that.

And that, of course, gives him the benefit of the doubt in the first place, for not getting his job done. IMO this is not good.

 

[jggordo]

I'm not sure that I buy this ...but for the moment, I'll respond based on the assumption that what you say is true.

In that event, I still have a HUGE problem with Stowe. Because, while he is giving lip service to making things right, his solution of walking away from the problem doesn't accomplish anything for justice.

In that scenario, he's abandoned a quest for justice, and prioritized his own reputation just in case there's a loss at trial, which is a prima donna attitude. If he claims he is the only one that cares about Justice for Holly, but then leaves the case to be handled by those who don't care, what does that say about him and his priorities? I have a real problem with that.

And that, of course, gives him the benefit of the doubt in the first place, for not getting his job done. IMO this is not good.

I believe it is much more than Stowe's reputation at stake. There is only one bite at the apple of Justice for Holly. If it is prosecuted with known errors by him it could cause a mistrial or subsequent error for appeal. IMO that is not Justice for Holly. If witness statements are made with deals with devils or coerced, without any DNA evidence or corroborating evidence it could be all for nothing. From the beginning the local Public Defense claimed they could not represent the defendants due to a conflict of interest. Which leads me to believe they were already defending perspective upcoming witnesses. Stowe was saying quite privately that there are problems with this investigation. The TBI Director went public with statements that were made at private meetings. Now that cat is out of the bag. I just don't think the DA is abandoning the quest for Justice, in contrast I believe he is protecting it.

There is a current case of a decade old case in MO that not only got the conviction set aside but also the defendant is suing all parties personally, including LE investigators DA (who is now a Judge) and County and City for a figure that began at $100M. It goes to trial this August and so far has cost the city $250K to defend. Obtaining a conviction "at all cost" can backfire. Currently the second defendant is still in prison awaiting his appeals process. The case has been on 48 hours several times.

http://www.abc17news.com/news/state-...g/-/index.html

JMO's

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?237659-Ryan-Ferguson-100M-Wrongful-Coviction-Lawsuit

 

[shefner]

I believe it is much more than Stowe's reputation at stake. There is only one bite at the apple of Justice for Holly. If it is prosecuted with known errors by him it could cause a mistrial or subsequent error for appeal. IMO that is not Justice for Holly. If witness statements are made with deals with devils or coerced, without any DNA evidence or corroborating evidence it could be all for nothing. From the beginning the local Public Defense claimed they could not represent the defendants due to a conflict of interest. Which leads me to believe they were already defending perspective upcoming witnesses. Stowe was saying quite privately that there are problems with this investigation. The TBI Director went public with statements that were made at private meetings. Now that cat is out of the bag. I just don't think the DA is abandoning the quest for Justice, in contrast I believe he is protecting it.

There is a current case of a decade old case in MO that not only got the conviction set aside but also the defendant is suing all parties personally, including LE investigators DA (who is now a Judge) and County and City for a figure that began at $100M. It goes to trial this August and so far has cost the city $250K to defend. Obtaining a conviction "at all cost" can backfire. Currently the second defendant is still in prison awaiting his appeals process. The case has been on 48 hours several times.

http://www.abc17news.com/news/state-...g/-/index.html

JMO's

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?237659-Ryan-Ferguson-100M-Wrongful-Coviction-Lawsuit

Excellent post jggordo.....Insightful thoughts.

 

[jggordo]

As far as I'm concerned the outgoing DA was to have delivered discovery to Defense by August 31, 2014. Dog.on.cute could better comment on that as she is the calendar lady.** But in that with him not following the Judge's order to that end he should be held in contempt of Court or at least show cause. I understand there was an election involved and a changing of the DAs but politics has no place in Justice for victims. It is not only unprofessional but unacceptable and IMO a Judge should not stand for it. Judges have Chambers for issues just as these.

JMO's

**I meant that in an appreciative and endearing way**

 

[dog.gone.cute]

As far as I'm concerned the outgoing DA was to have delivered discovery to Defense by August 31, 2014.

Dog.on.cute could better comment on that as she is the calendar lady.** But in that with him not following the Judge's order to that end he should be held in contempt of Court or at least show cause.

I understand there was an election involved and a changing of the DAs but politics has no place in Justice for victims. It is not only unprofessional but unacceptable and IMO a Judge should not stand for it. Judges have Chambers for issues just as these.

JMO's

**I meant that in an appreciative and endearing way**

:seeya: Hi jggordo !

- Per the Scheduling Order, discovery was due August 29, 2014.

- The new D.A. Stowe took office on September 1, 2014.

- Holly's remain were found on September 7, 2014.


As to the discovery, the previous D.A. should have provided whatever discovery they had in their possession to the defense up to that due date of August 29, 2014 ... and they had appx. 5-6 months to work on that.

Now, what discovery was provided to the defense, we do not know ... of course, we know virtually zero as to the evidence in this case.

Holly's remains were found/identified September 7, so when the D.A. received this information, it should have been provided to the defense as it part of the discovery process, which is to provide the parties with info as it is discovered.

Now, this is JMO, but I think the info regarding Holly's remains was not provided to the defense because it is still an ongoing investigation, there is one "immunity deal" still pending, and no telling IF there are more arrests coming and/or more "immunity deals."

BUT this is no excuse for the D.A. to not provide discovery ... IF there is a problem, then file the proper motions with the court.

Now, what I don't understand is WHY the defense waited until the hearing date of December 17, 2014, Criminal Motion Day per the previous Scheduling Order, to tell the court that they had not been provided discovery and in particular, the discovery regarding Holly's remains being found.

Yes, the D.A. had appx. 3 months to provide this info to the defense, but the defense had time to file a motion to compel this discovery and should have filed it sooner, IMO.

And now, because the D.A. did not provide certain discovery to the defense, they want the charges against ZA and JA dismissed :gaah:

Oh -- D.A. Stowe recused himself from the case and are awaiting the appointment of a special prosecutor :gaah:

JMO but I don't think the judge is going to just dismiss the charges against the defendants because discovery was not provided, and we the public do NOT know IF any discovery was provided.

And the judge should take into consideration the fact that Stowe took office when the discovery was due by the previous D.A., Stowe has recused himself from the case, and awaiting a special prosecutor.

What a hot mess !

I hope that made sense !

JMO and :moo:

 

[dog.gone.cute]

From WBBJ:

Judge: Bobo case can't move forward until new prosecutor appointed

Officials with Judge Creed McGinley's office say the Holly Bobo case cannot move forward until the new special prosecutor is appointed.

That means no new motions or requests can be granted until the new prosecutor presides over the case.


Link: http://www.wbbjtv.com/news/local/Ju...until-new-prosecutor-appointed-287377371.html

 

[OldSteve]

:seeya: Hi jggordo !

- Per the Scheduling Order, discovery was due August 29, 2014.

- The new D.A. Stowe took office on September 1, 2014.

- Holly's remain were found on September 7, 2014.


As to the discovery, the previous D.A. should have provided whatever discovery they had in their possession to the defense up to that due date of August 29, 2014 ... and they had appx. 5-6 months to work on that.

Now, what discovery was provided to the defense, we do not know ... of course, we know virtually zero as to the evidence in this case.

Holly's remains were found/identified September 7, so when the D.A. received this information, it should have been provided to the defense as it part of the discovery process, which is to provide the parties with info as it is discovered.

Now, this is JMO, but I think the info regarding Holly's remains was not provided to the defense because it is still an ongoing investigation, there is one "immunity deal" still pending, and no telling IF there are more arrests coming and/or more "immunity deals."

BUT this is no excuse for the D.A. to not provide discovery ... IF there is a problem, then file the proper motions with the court.

Now, what I don't understand is WHY the defense waited until the hearing date of December 17, 2014, Criminal Motion Day per the previous Scheduling Order, to tell the court that they had not been provided discovery and in particular, the discovery regarding Holly's remains being found.

Yes, the D.A. had appx. 3 months to provide this info to the defense, but the defense had time to file a motion to compel this discovery and should have filed it sooner, IMO.

And now, because the D.A. did not provide certain discovery to the defense, they want the charges against ZA and JA dismissed :gaah:

Oh -- D.A. Stowe recused himself from the case and are awaiting the appointment of a special prosecutor :gaah:

JMO but I don't think the judge is going to just dismiss the charges against the defendants because discovery was not provided, and we the public do NOT know IF any discovery was provided.

And the judge should take into consideration the fact that Stowe took office when the discovery was due by the previous D.A., Stowe has recused himself from the case, and awaiting a special prosecutor.

What a hot mess !

I hope that made sense !

JMO and :moo:

:seeya: happy new year dog.gone.cute Thanks for info ^^ - wow! you are right about it being a mess!

 

[dog.gone.cute]

:seeya: happy new year dog.gone.cute Thanks for info ^^ - wow! you are right about it being a mess!

:seeya: Happy New Year to you, OS ! And thank you.

Yes, this case is a serious hot mess ... and I sure hope it gets straightens out for Holly !!!

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Not sure if this was posted so posting just in case


Snippets from WKRN:


Special prosecutor in Holly Bobo case expected to be named any day:


- District Attorney Matt Stowe&#8217;s office said the announcement of who will be the special prosecutor for the Holly Bobo murder case could come any day.

- Autry and Adams are due back in court January 14.

- Judge McGinley also said he anticipates approving a motion for a change of venue for the murder trials if the defense attorneys make the request.

- Lawyers for both men said they plan to ask for a change of venue.


http://wkrn.com/2015/01/02/special-prosecutor-in-holly-bobo-case-expected-to-be-named-any-day/

 

[octobermoon]

By Nick Beres. CREATED 1:55 PM
NASHVILLE, Tenn. - It's a bizarre twist. The District Attorney once set to prosecute Holly Bobo's accused killers may now actually become a key witness for the defense.

How on earth could this happen?

Consider that now nearly a year after two men were charged with murdering Holly Bobo, there's no one to prosecute the case.

Last month District Attorney Matt Stowe removed himself after a dispute with the TBI, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's in the clear.

A staffer at Stowe's office said her boss has recused himself and will no longer answer questions about the Bobo case.

But that doesn't mean defense attorneys for prime suspects Zach Adams and Jason Autry aren't asking.

"If he's made allegations of misconduct on behalf of the TBI then I demand to know what they are specifically," said Autry's attorney Fletcher Long.

http://www.jrn.com/newschannel5/news/Strange-New-Twist-In-The-Holly-Bobo-Case-287550941.html

 

[dog.gone.cute]

By Nick Beres. CREATED 1:55 PM

It's a bizarre twist.

The District Attorney once set to prosecute Holly Bobo's accused killers may now actually become a key witness for the defense.

How on earth could this happen?

http://www.jrn.com/newschannel5/news/Strange-New-Twist-In-The-Holly-Bobo-Case-287550941.html

Respectfully Snipped and BBM: Wow ! Un-freakin-believable !

Now, while I believe that ZA and JA are involved with the kidnapping and murder of Holly ...

I have to say that I cannot blame their defense attorneys for trying to get to the bottom of this hot mess with the TBI and Stowe.


:seeya: And Thanks, octobermoon, for this update !


ETA: Does anyone know IF Stowe would be compelled to release whatever information he has regarding these allegations towards the TBI if he is subpoenaed by the defense ?

Stowe is still the current D.A., but he has recused himself from prosecuting Holly's case.

So IF Stowe does not want to answer any questions by the defense, what argument would he use NOT to answer any question? Totally guessing here as IANAL, but his role as the D.A. does not fall under "attorney-client privilege."

In other words, is there anything that would prevent Stowe from telling what happened between him and the TBI ?

:dunno:

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Wow. A hot mess indeed!

 

[Tugela]

Respectfully Snipped and BBM: Wow ! Un-freakin-believable !

Now, while I believe that ZA and JA are involved with the kidnapping and murder of Holly ...

I have to say that I cannot blame their defense attorneys for trying to get to the bottom of this hot mess with the TBI and Stowe.


:seeya: And Thanks, octobermoon, for this update !


ETA: Does anyone know IF Stowe would be compelled to release whatever information he has regarding these allegations towards the TBI if he is subpoenaed by the defense ?

Stowe is still the current D.A., but he has recused himself from prosecuting Holly's case.

So IF Stowe does not want to answer any questions by the defense, what argument would he use NOT to answer any question? Totally guessing here as IANAL, but his role as the D.A. does not fall under "attorney-client privilege."

In other words, is there anything that would prevent Stowe from telling what happened between him and the TBI ?

:dunno:

I think the issues Stowe had will become self evident to the defense once they receive discovery.

Beyond that I don't think they can compel him to testify, since there is nothing to suggest that he is in possession of any secret information outside of whatever might be in discovery. If he had a difference of opinion regarding tactics, interpretation of evidence or just a plain personality conflict, that in itself would not be admissible as evidence in court. He is not a collector or analyzer of forensic (or other) evidence, so he would have nothing of value to add to a trial outside of an opinion, and that would be regarded as prejudicial one way or another. So, unless they can show that he is in possession of undisclosed evidence, or is aware of it, they can't call him.

 

[katydid23]

Wow. A hot mess indeed!

I was just complaining about the hot mess going on in the Arias trial. Now it doesn't look so bad. :no: