Holly Bobo found deceased, discussion thread *Arrests* #7

[SteveS]

Larry was asked, "To these defense attorney's that say 'we haven't seen evidence that Holly's skull has been found' you say what?"

He simply responded, "It's been found."

Which really doesn't address the real issue, and which actually makes the issue more glaring: it's almost 8 months later, and the evidence showng she has been found STILL hasn't been provided to the defense? "Larry Stone said it on TV, so now you know" is not the legal process, by any means, and it's way late to boot. 8 friggin months! Good grief!

The judge's declarations that he isn't going to stand for hiding of evidence continues to ring incredibly hollow.

 

[steelman]

It's the TBI---read this article.

http://wreg.com/2014/11/07/memphis-legislator-ready-to-unveil-secrecy-of-tbi-dcs/

You have the right to know nothing.

Those people in Tennessee need to get their S$%$T together.

 

[SteveS]

It's the TBI---read this article.

http://wreg.com/2014/11/07/memphis-legislator-ready-to-unveil-secrecy-of-tbi-dcs/

You have the right to know nothing.

Those people in Tennessee need to get their S$%$T together.

That's NOT pertinent to the issue here. That article (already discussed at length in this thread) was about keeping things from the PUBLIC. But not from defense in a trial. Keeping TBI evidence from defense is not legally permissible, but also it's NOT being said in the article that it's happening (in this case, or any other).

 

[Tugela]

That's NOT pertinent to the issue here. That article (already discussed at length in this thread) was about keeping things from the PUBLIC. But not from defense in a trial. Keeping TBI evidence from defense is not legally permissible, but also it's NOT being said in the article that it's happening (in this case, or any other).

It is the prosecution that cannot keep information from the defense, not the TBI. The TBI is neither the prosecution nor the jurisdictional investigative agency. They are not an interested party in the proceedings. Remember, the prosecution of the offence is conducted by the state, not the State. A subtle distinction, but a critical one and one you keep missing.

If the TBI is aware of information they have no obligation to share it with anyone. However, once that information has been shared with the jurisdictional investigative agency it becomes part of the case file and should be turned over to the prosecution. The prosecutor is the person (and his/her office) are the ones responsible for ensuring that discovery of information in the case file is made available to the defense.

 

[Tugela]

Chainsaw, yes that is the correct analysis (that the presence of the immunity deal made SA's offered testimony IN his best interest, rather than against it - and therefore it would not be usable after his death). And yes there are other theoretical exceptions to the hearsay rule, which would not be applicable in this situation but might make it admissible in a different case.

You clearly have been on the right track all along. No question. I was just trying make it clearer for you.

It needs to be noted that the exceptions flow from case law rulings, that first emerged by being asserted at trial, then upheld, and were ultimately codified. The point being, the broad strokes are defined, but the limits can be fuzzy and evolve a bit over time.

The exception to the hearsay rule that he was referring to involves statements made by an individual to a third party that were contrary to their interests. Under those circumstances the third party could testify to what was claimed even though it was hearsay due to the exception. The exception would NOT apply if the statements were about the actions of some other person. That would remain inadmissible as hearsay if the third party was called to testify. Under those circumstances you would need the original person making the statement to repeat that in court, and if they were dead then it would be out of bounds.

For example, supposed Tricia Griffith owner of Websleuths.com told me that she and her spouse assassinated their neighbor. Even though I personally did not witness the event, I can still testify that Tricia told me that under the hearsay exception, since Tricia freely made a statement against her interests and she obviously would not be available to testify as such in her trial. But, if Tricia died prior to her trial and they proceeded against her spouse only, the statements she made to me would become inadmissible since they would no longer fall under the hearsay exception. The statements could only be used against Tricia, not her spouse in that hypothetical situation.

This situation does apply in at least some instances in the Bobo case. They could use the hearsay exception to introduce statements made by DA in his rape trial for example, but the same statements would not be admissible in the trial of the other two unless he repeated them in open court.

In the case of SA, they could have done the same thing, meaning that his statements could have been used against him if the immunity deal was overturned. To use his statements against the other two they would have needed SA to repeat them in court and be subject to cross examination. However, the fact that they were attempting to retract the immunity deal implies that whatever he told them not only could not be corroborated, but that there was in addition evidence that his statements were untrue as well. Certainly they saw no value in whatever it was that he told them.
Him now being dead doesn't change that. It is not uncommon for charges to be dropped or altered when important witnesses die (or they don't show up at court) and their testimony can no longer be used.

 

[wfgodot]

So....what's the % chance this case ever goes to trial -- as presently constituted, that is?

And....what's the % chance the state gets a conviction -- based on a best-guess as to what they have to work with -- if it does make it to and through the docket?

Just curious what you guys think; I've been posting on this thread almost since Day One and I have no idea.

 

[SteveS]

Tugela, with all due respect, <modsnip>(the TBI are indeed considered part of the state and prosecution in this or any criminal case in TN)<modsnip>.

Your reasoning on the applicability of an "against self interest" hearsay exception, in this case as pertains to SA, is a bit amiss but ends at the correct bottom line (which is that SA's testimony would be inadmissible here). That's all that really matters for this discussion - to understand that SA's testimony is not usable under this exception.

But the admissibility could change, if it was discovered he had been murdered by the defendants somehow to keep him quiet, and other criteria was met. In that case, a different hearsay exception would be applicable.

 

[SteveS]

So....what's the % chance this case ever goes to trial -- as presently constituted, that is?

And....what's the % chance the state gets a conviction -- based on a best-guess as to what they have to work with -- if it does make it to and through the docket?

Just curious what you guys think; I've been posting on this thread almost since Day One and I have no idea.

We know so little about the prosecution's evidence that it's impossible to say, frankly. This judge has been lenient to the point of ridiculousness on the matter of disclosure of evidence to the defense, but since he's still making the decisions, and he's repeatedly shown a lacking of willingness to hold the prosecution to their duty, I'm guessing it will get to trial some day.

 

[OldSteve]

We know so little about the prosecution's evidence that it's impossible to say, frankly. This judge has been lenient to the point of ridiculousness on the matter of disclosure of evidence to the defense, but since he's still making the decisions, and he's repeatedly shown a lacking of willingness to hold the prosecution to their duty, I'm guessing it will get to trial some day.

The power a judge has; truly amazing! Hadn't realized this till now.

 

[Foxfire]

From News Channel 5:

Man Who Found Holly Bobo: 'We Want Justice For Holly'

Larry was asked, "To these defense attorney's that say 'we haven't seen evidence that Holly's skull has been found' you say what?"

He simply responded, "It's been found."

If those dental records are in fact correct, Larry will always be the man who found Holly Bobo.


Link: http://www.scrippsmedia.com/newscha...Bobo-We-Want-Justice-For-Holly-301450711.html


BBM: Sure wish we would have learned more about what he found because there is so much speculation ...

:waitasec: But IIRC, the TBI told him to :silenced:

Heartwrenching testimony by Larry Stone; any time he was Ginseng hunting these last four years, he wasn't just looking for a plant.

"I was always looking for her [Holly].
____________________

"The innocent victims will speak too and guide those who will only listen"...

 

[~n/t~]

From News Channel 5:

Man Who Found Holly Bobo: 'We Want Justice For Holly'

Larry was asked, "To these defense attorney's that say 'we haven't seen evidence that Holly's skull has been found' you say what?"

He simply responded, "It's been found."

If those dental records are in fact correct, Larry will always be the man who found Holly Bobo.


Link: http://www.scrippsmedia.com/newscha...Bobo-We-Want-Justice-For-Holly-301450711.html


BBM: Sure wish we would have learned more about what he found because there is so much speculation ...

:waitasec: But IIRC, the TBI told him to :silenced:

Hiya! :seeya:

I think we can safely assume her skull was found. He wouldn't put it out there if he hadn't. I just hope this will be his last interview. I wouldn't want anyone or anything jeopardizing the trial!!

 

[jggordo]

Heartwrenching testimony by Larry Stone; any time he was Ginseng hunting these last four years, he wasn't just looking for a plant.

"I was always looking for her [Holly].
____________________

"The innocent victims will speak too and guide those who will only listen"...

I may be a pessimist but my take away from the interview was that he is making a clear foundation for the reward money. Thus the "I was always looking for Holly". Also "if the dental records are correct Larry Stone will always be the man who found Holly". He also made a statement to the effect of "no body, no case". To me there was little to no new information from the interview other than that. I am going to reserve judgment as to how I feel as to the heartfelt testimony from him toward the family and friends of Holly Bobo until I see whether $ is the motivation.

JMO's

 

[AmandaReckonwith]

I'm OK with $ being the motivation for the interview actually, although that needs to be all he says in public about finding her.

I think he was moved and changed by finding her (and I believe he was always keeping an eye open, and is not the only hunter who was), and I believe he is sincere. I hope he gets a ton of money.

 

[Bali]

So whatcha wanna bet the prosecutor will give the defense another dump of garbage disclosure that contains no actual evidence the day before the next hearing so they can argue that they actually are turning over evidence?

 

[Hatfield]

WOW ... checkout this video from NC5 on Shayne Austin !

Legal Analyst: Suspect’s Death Could Hurt Prosecution In Bobo Case

A prime suspect and key witness in the Holly Bobo case is dead. NewsChannel 5 has learned more about Shayne Austin and his link to the high-profile murder, and why the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation had such an interest in him.

Link: http://newschannel5.video.jrn.com/L...-Could-Hurt-Prosecution-In-Bobo-Case-28643382


:seeya: And watch it as soon as you can because sometimes articles/videos go "poof" !

Thanks for finding this. At least one of the family members does not think it was a suicide.

The video says that more will be known after an autopsy. It seems that should have been done by now. Wonder if the autopsy results will ever get publisized.

 

[SteveS]

Thanks for finding this. At least one of the family members does not think it was a suicide.

The video says that more will be known after an autopsy. It seems that should have been done by now. Wonder if the autopsy results will ever get publisized.

I'd quibble with the statement that "At least one of the family members does not think it was a suicide." That's a current tense assertion, but there's no one saying that's what what they currently think. That was months ago, the week of the suicide.

Yes, that news report from a few days after the suicide did say that at that time one family member had questions about whether or not it was a suicide, in the immediate aftermath of his death. But that's to be expected, as most families of suicide victims have a hard time accepting it. Is it possible that some of them still have questions? Sure. But it's also possible that those questions have been answered.

 

[Leader6518]

For Holly's sake, I hope that when we get to trial, we'll think, "Wow, I can't believe I was so wrong about the possibilities for this case. I never knew there was all this evidence. I didn't think they had much at all. And the prosecution team is so sharp."

But to this moment, I really don't like what I've seen.

I know we haven't been given much info, but I don't believe the states case is solely from statements from various peeps. I think LE took those statements and used the info for search warrants and found corroborating evidence to back charges. The immunity deal for SA was for information that lead to Holly's remains being found, when they weren't during the search, LE decided to threaten to revoke the immunity deal. Of course, that was being handled in a different court. Perhaps SA did offer up more info. We don't know.

I would bet any charges coming from statements of those involved has resulted in evidence found based on those statements. I figure it gave LE new leads and places to look. Finding Holly's remains has evidently produced other evidence.

I would not fall for the oldest defense lawyer trick in the book where they have not been given any evidence that ties their client to the kidnapping and murder. And that is their claim. The fact TBI still has evidence to process means the defense team knows more is out there they don't have, but they do have some discovery. This play on words to the public is the defenses way of creating reasonable doubt with the jury pool. Make them believe they are getting nothing from the prosecution, so the public doubts the strength and integrity of the case.

Unfortunately, the squabble between organizations is play right in to the defense teams hands.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Snippets From News Channel 5: JA's Defense Attorney Fletcher Long:


Court Case Set To Begin For Attorneys Indicted Over Billing Dispute

An attorney involved in the Holly Bobo trial was set to head to court to face his own charges.

It’s a court case that could have a big impact on the Holly Bobo trial. Attorney Fletcher Long represents Jason Autry, one of the men charged with Bobo’s murder.
...
If convicted, Long could lose his license and would no longer be able to represent Autry.


http://www.scrippsmedia.com/newscha...-Indicted-Over-Billing-Dispute-302363751.html

 

[dog.gone.cute]

:seeya:

I went back to check to see when SA received that "immunity deal" and when it was revoked ...

The immunity deal was signed on March 6, 2014.

:tyou: jggordo !


Below are some links to WS posts previously made about the immunity deal.

Note that some of the MSM links are no longer working ... "poof" !


----------

From jggordo: 5-15-14

Link to Post:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ST*-2014-discussion-3&p=10545723#post10545723


IMO, the most interesting part of the immunity agreement is the date it was signed. It was signed on March 6, 2014. The searches had concluded by that date. It seems to me that LE would know whether Holly's body (or parts) had been found or not by that time. If they knew on the 6th that they had NOT found her body or parts in the location he indicated or had ever been there, and they had him sign the agreement anyway I believe that would be considered entrapment.

The way I read the agreement, it seems to me that they asked whether he was involved in the actual kidnapping, drugging or killing of Holly. He must have said no. Because they built it in that if they found evidence that he DID, then the deal is off the table.

I think his violation has to do with him lying about his involvement to the crimes themselves. TBI stated that they had "witnesses" at the PC. And anyone else involved should expect "a knock at your door" and "you know who you are". A direct message to Shayne I believe. JMO's

http://www.scribd.com/doc/221108680/...nt-Austin-v-TN


----------


From jggordo: 4-29-14

Link to Post:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ST*-2014-discussion-3&p=10497776#post10497776


Just found this link now regarding SA and the third link:
http://www.jacksonsun.com/article/20...nclick_check=1

"According to the documents, prosecutors plan to indict Shayne Kyle Austin, who previously had been granted immunity in exchange for his cooperation in the investigation.

"The state voided the immunity agreement because Austin was not completely truthful and forthcoming, according to an email from Assistant District Attorney General Beth Boswell to Austin&#8217;s lawyer, Luke Evans. The email was sent on March 27 [2014]."

More specifically, the agreement said,&#8220;In exchange for the total cooperation of Shayne Kyle Austin, the State agrees to grant him immunity for all charges arising out of the disposal, destruction, burial and/or concealment of Holly Bobo&#8217;s deceased body, conditioned upon him assisting us in recovering the body of Holly Bobo.&#8221;

The immunity agreement said the state would also not charge Austin with tampering with evidence or accessory after the fact &#8220;if he was present for, if he participated in, of (sic) if he has information concerning the disposal, destruction, burial, and or concealment&#8221; of Bobo&#8217;s body or other items of evidence connected to or belonging to her."

----------

 

[Hatfield]

Does anyone know if autopsy results were ever released for SA?

I dont think they have because i did try searching for them and didnt find any updates yet.

It would be interesting if we could read the results somewhere once we can find them.

If he died of a gunshot then I suppose the only things to look for on the body that may lend itself to something other than suicide is if there were other bruises, cuts, scrapes or something like that which could indicate he was in some sort of struggle with someone.