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

[tlcya]

[video=youtube;KwxwUiDbRCk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwxwUiDbRCk[/video]

Well put the last several posts about exactly what stinks about this whole case and the subsequent arrests.

 

[Dr. Know?]

Not sure if this is a repeat but I get it now.

Prosecutor responds to motion in Holly Bobo case

"I've read the motion, disagree with many of the assertions and will file a written response in due course," Nichols said in a written statement to The Tennessean. "Defense counsel failed to mention that one of the other defense attorneys in this case filed a Motion to Vacate my appointment the day after I was appointed. So, step one is to wait for the judge to rule on the Motion to Vacate next month and he either confirms me as the special prosecutor or removes me from the case. Step two, (depending on the judge's ruling in step one) will include answering defense motions, filing our own motions, engaging in the discovery process and requesting a trial date."

http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...tor-responds-to-motion-in-bobo-case/24994633/

 

[Dr. Know?]

From the linked article. I can see some concern naming all the possible co-conspirators.

Herbison said his office has requested that the state provide the time and date of each offense listed in the indictment against Autry, and to additionally submit the names of everyone present and any co-conspirators, the cause of death and the names of the people prosecution believe caused that death.

 

[Dr. Know?]

Stacey Barchenger ‏@sbarchenger · 10h10 hours ago
Same attorney duo made similar demands in Vandy rape case: Attorney in Holly Bobo seeks evidence or jail for DA http://tnne.ws/1bems2f

https://twitter.com/sbarchenger/status/578236325909889024

 

[Tugela]

Not sure if this is a repeat but I get it now.

Prosecutor responds to motion in Holly Bobo case

"I've read the motion, disagree with many of the assertions and will file a written response in due course," Nichols said in a written statement to The Tennessean. "Defense counsel failed to mention that one of the other defense attorneys in this case filed a Motion to Vacate my appointment the day after I was appointed. So, step one is to wait for the judge to rule on the Motion to Vacate next month and he either confirms me as the special prosecutor or removes me from the case. Step two, (depending on the judge's ruling in step one) will include answering defense motions, filing our own motions, engaging in the discovery process and requesting a trial date."

http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...tor-responds-to-motion-in-bobo-case/24994633/

I don't see why she can't turn over discovery now, irrespective of what other motions have been filed. She is basically stalling.

 

[Dr. Know?]

I thought about that, why she couldn't. I don't blame her or the prosecutors office taking that stance either. If she's not the special prosecutor, let the judge decide. If it's her, she will turn it over & if not, let the selected prosecutor do it.

I'm wondering if Nichols is playing with the terrible two defense lawyers? Where's that judges ruling? jmo

 

[Chainsaw385]

As posted above if the defense made a motion to dismiss the current prosecutor ..........I am not sure that anything had to be turned over until there was a ruling on this.
I have no clue what this all means .....for instance if ZA's attorney filed this motion would it also cause a delay in JA's case

The defense needs to see the evidence but this latest motion by the prosecution is starting to explain why they did not turn it over and miss the last deadline but whoever prosecutes the case is going to use the same evidence no matter who takes it to trial.

Maybe the judge is more to blame then the prosecution for the delays since the end of December.

It is interesting and why I like to follow trials because everyone single one follows a different path.......but the prosecution will not release anything until they absolutely have to .....they never do.

 

[pearl]

Special thanks to Dr. Know? for finding and posting the special prosecutor's response. IMO only, Mr. Long likes to hear the sound of his voice or see his written word. Does he or doesn't he realize that removing Ms. Nichols and appointing someone else will just prolong his defendant's wait. Me thinks that is the objective. Delay, delay, delay. Again, IMO, I think a plea deal is in the works and it does not involve Mr. Autry. Someone up thread mentioned ZA's physical appearance in court dates. ZA appears to be bearing the weight of the world while JA proclaims "comes an innocent man." What is the old adage about protesting too much? Seems to apply here. Again, IMO only.

 

[Dr. Know?]

At this rate, it will last as long as Jodi Arias' trial.

These defense lawyers have their own problems and had the Vandy case to boot, playing tag team during their problems. The articles from last week indicate they were booted off that case & an appeals lawyer(s) were hired, even though sentencing has not been given. April, iirc. Is that common in TN?

 

[Dr. Know?]

Here's Fletch's response.

Ex-Vandy player hires attorneys for rape appeal

...
"They hired me to try that case and get a good result and I didn't," Long said. "If you show up at the Derby with a horse you think is a thoroughbred and a winner, and you finish last, you may lose confidence in that horse. If they've lost confidence in me, they need to hire somebody else."
...
Hiring new attorneys for an appeals process is not unusual after criminal convictions.

...
Judge Monte Watkins, who presided over the trial, has yet to approve a substitution of attorneys request. Albert Perez Jr., a friend of Vandenburg's family who also represented Vandenburg, said he could not comment on "the departure" of Long and Herbison until it was "appropriately before the court."


http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...don-vandenburg-hiring-new-attorneys/70176480/

 

[SteveS]

I don't see why she can't turn over discovery now, irrespective of what other motions have been filed. She is basically stalling.

Agreed. And she's not the first, just the latest, doing so in this case.

Per the motion (numbering added, but wording unedited):

Each of the three prosecutors responsible for this case has danced around the maypole regarding the Bill of Particulars which the Court ordered almost ten months ago.
1 Mr. McAdams simply, but flagrantly, ignored the Court’s order.
2 Mr. Stowe requested additional time, but never complied. The Court on December 17, 2014 ordered the State to file the Bill of Particulars on or before December 24, 2014. In a motion bearing a certificate of service of December 23, 2014, Mr. Stowe moved for his own recusal. This motion was filed on December 29, 2014, and the Court granted the motion in an order filed January 5, 2015.
3 Ms. Nichols has been similarly noncompliant. She was appointed District Attorney Pro Tempore by order filed November 3, 2014. A motion filed on December 17, 2014 by Amy Weirich, District Attorney General for Shelby County and Ms. Nichols’ superior, requested permission to remove Ms. Nichols as District Attorney Pro Tem. This order was granted by the Court on the same day that it was filed. When Mr. Stowe’s recusal was granted in an order filed January 5, 2015, the Court on the next day reappointed Ms. Nichols as District Attorney Pro Tem. Except for a hiatus of twenty (20) days during the holiday season, Ms. Nichols has served in this case for the past four months. That is ample time to have complied with the Court’s orders which are now more than nine months old.

 

[Dr. Know?]

Maybe there's a federal indictment coming down on the defense? Maybe there's a plea deal, maybe this prosecution knows something they don't? (nah, they would).

But the special prosecutor's position hasn't even been decided on. Maybe the judge should be thanked? j/k

Me, after reading JA's attorney's past & potential cases against them, would you turn evidence over to them with their own legal problems pending? I've known some of their recent history since the announcement of who would represent JA. Haven't checked the state bar complaints though. jmo

ETA, I've checked the state bar records of JA's defense team before and it isn't pretty, just not lately. imo

 

[~n/t~]

From the linked article. I can see some concern naming all the possible co-conspirators.

Why? Shouldn't they have that information by now. 6 months later?

 

[~n/t~]

Where is the Judge??????:gaah:

 

[Chainsaw385]

Per the motion (numbering added, but wording unedited):

YOU FORGOT TO ADD THIS......

"The State did thereafter serve a voluminous "document dump" on defense counsel.This belated discovery,however,is conspicuously lacking in forensic reports relative to the remains of Holly Bobo,which are said to have been found in early September 2014-more then 6 months ago."

AND THIS......

"The principal relief the accused seeks in this motion of dismissal of this indictment under TENN.R.CRIM.P. 48(b)"

here is that statute...."(b) By the Court. The court may dismiss an indictment, information, or complaint if unnecessary delay occurs in:

(1) presenting a charge to a grand jury;

(2) filing an information against a defendant; or

(3) bringing a defendant to trial.

So what we have here is a motion to dismiss based on law 48(b)........lack of a speedy trial......(lack of evidence motion will come later)

It is important to note that even though they referred to it as a "document dump" there has been discovery turned over......what is more important about this document dump is the defense is only complaining about lack of forensics in this discovery not the contents themselves.

This motion is nothing alarming...especially given that there has been a previous motion to dismiss the prosecutor.A quick search showed many cases where it has been motioned and denied.

Don't get me wrong the defense needs a bill of particulars, forensics and everything else but it appears they are not yet legally required to turn everything over.I expect it to be turned over when the judge rules on the dismiss the prosecutor motion.

There is no wording in this motion to dismiss for lack of evidence......I'm sure they will but it is too early yet.....and once again that will not be a surprise either.

It is a huge clue about what is really going on when the best they can complain about that "document dump" is it lacked forensics.

***** I have read a number of motions thru the years and this one looks like a bunch of hillbillies wrote it....a lot of slang was used...they refer to SA as Shayne "LET'S MAKE A DEAL" Austin.This could also be a clue about what SA had told investigators.,,,and this info was involved in that "document dump".

 

[Bali]

Why? Shouldn't they have that information by now. 6 months later?

If you ask me, if this case goes to trial, the prosecution's statements about arresting several more unnamed people could hurt them. They're going to have to include all these people in their theory of the crime because they've already said they were involved. The defense is going to have a field day arguing that the *other* people committed the murder instead.

 

[Dogface]

One thing that gives me a shred of hope to hang onto is the fact that these are the same courts that allowed ZA to skate so many times before, yet they are clinging to this still. Why?

 

[SteveS]

YOU FORGOT TO ADD THIS......

I didn't forget anything as to the point I was making in that post (about the lack of a Bill of Particulars). I shared the outline offered, verbatim, from the motion.

Here was what I was sharing in the post you responded to:

"Each of the three prosecutors responsible for this case has danced around the maypole regarding the Bill of Particulars which the Court ordered almost ten months ago."

I know you are claiming the prosecution has done what they are supposed to do. So, please show where the prosecution has - at any point in over 10 months since the arrest - provided a Bill of Particulars to the court and defense as ordered by the court. TIA.

"Mr. Autry was charged in an indictment filed April 29, 2014, and 46 weeks later he and his counsel have still not been meaningfully informed of the nature and cause of the accusation."

 

[~Lyric~]

Hey Ladies and Gentlemen,

Well here we go from Nick Beres FB page:

NC5_NickBeres
4 hrs · Edited ·
A RESPONSE FROM HOLLY BOBO SPECIAL PROSECUTOR! I figured we'd hear something after defense attorneys started demanding that she be arrested. They're upset because Jennifer Nichols has yet to provide them with all of the discovery evidence -- which, by the way, was a direct order from the judge. What's Nichols' explanation? She told the Tennessean she's waiting to see how the judge rules on a completely separate motion filed several weeks ago by the defense challenging her role as special prosecutor. Waiting for that doesn't make sense to me. For now she is the special prosecutor. This challenge may or may not have merit. But you don't just stop what you're doing. She is still the special prosecutor. Shouldn't she be working the case? It's strange. More delay tactics from both the prosecution and the defense.

https://www.facebook.com/NC5NickBer...50827361639/10152640803906640/?type=1&theater

Jennifer Nichols response:

"I've read the motion, disagree with many of the assertions and will file a written response in due course," Nichols said in a written statement to The Tennessean. "Defense counsel failed to mention that one of the other defense attorneys in this case filed a Motion to Vacate my appointment the day after I was appointed. So, step one is to wait for the judge to rule on the Motion to Vacate next month and he either confirms me as the special prosecutor or removes me from the case. Step two, (depending on the judge's ruling in step one) will include answering defense motions, filing our own motions, engaging in the discovery process and requesting a trial date."

http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...tor-responds-to-motion-in-bobo-case/24994633/

 

[SteveS]

One thing that gives me a shred of hope to hang onto is the fact that these are the same courts that allowed ZA to skate so many times before, yet they are clinging to this still. Why?

I would bet that it has to do with the extreme nature of the crime(s), and the desire to get a trial and perhaps justice for Holly.

No matter how negligent the prosecution is in fulfilling its duties, the court has to be aware of what a travesty it would be if murderers are allowed to walk - and not because of lack of evidence, but simply due to the failure of the prosecution to provide due process.

So from that perspective, the extreme latitude they are giving the prosecution is a positive.

OTOH, it's very concerning that the prosecution is putting the court in that position in the first place, and throughout. For no good reason other than a failure to do their job, they are endangering the case and providing ammo for an appeal if there's a conviction. Latitude has both limits and consequences. And while their repeated failure to perform doesn't prove that the prosecution's case is iffy, those actions certainly give that hint, which adds concerns on a completely different level. So there's that.