I am reading the court transcript from 10/30 (p. 20-31, Record of Proceedings Vol.2, linked below) and blown away at this interaction. JG is, IMO, a scary example of judicial overreach. I have faith SCOIN will address this situation appropriately. AJMO.
Bbm
This is from p. 28-30 re: AB and BR’s “gross negligence”:
“THE COURT (the Judge): And we, again, would pick the jury in Fort Wayne and bring them here to Carroll County for the trial.
There's a pending motion to suppress, there is the Franks that is not yet - I haven't finished even reading it or going through all of the hours of interviews that were provided on a flash drive- so you'll need a hearing date for that. Once you get the discovery and once you've had the opportunity to review the pleadings, you could either adopt those
pleadings or make your own, it's up to you. Anything else from the State?
MR. BALDWIN: Judge, we want to create a record on - to be clear on what you're doing: You are disqualifying Brad and me; is that correct?
THE COURT: Correct.
MR. BALDWIN: We would like to be heard through my attorney, David Hennessy.
THE COURT: Sure.
ATTORNEY DAVID HENNESSEY: Good morning, Your Honor. I do have a limited appearance on record which hasn't been removed or disqualified. The Court has my preliminary memorandum about disqualification when Mr. Rozzi and Mr. Baldwin were appointed counsel. This is yet different. The law that I gave the Court is even more certain. The Court appears to be saying that it's protecting Mr. Allen, but the Court's finding of gross negligence was summary, without notice, without the opportunity to be heard. Had you given Mr. Rozzi and Mr. Baldwin notice of your intentions on October 19th when they were formed, which seems to be like a week earlier, then they could have been prepared. I can tell you this on behalf of both of these gentlemen, you would have the Indiana Public Defender Council come testify, you would have competent attorneys from across the state come testify, you would have defense counsel that are - have been declared experts in criminal defense. Mr. Baldwin's one of a handful of lawyers in the state that's certified in criminal defense.
So your summary ruling violates the Constitution and your summary ruling is unfair to everyone, especially Mr. Allen, because he was never able to make a record. Your finding of gross negligence, what you cited to them in chambers, which has never been put on the record, is not gross negligence, it's a zealous representation, maybe too zealous for the Court's favor, but it was good lawyering. The memorandum on the Franks issue is a work of art. It's legal writing at its best.
THE COURT:
This has nothing to do with the Franks issue, sir.
MR. HENNESSEY: No, but that -
THE COURT: Nothing to do with that, so please stay -
MR. HENNESSEY:
No, it has to do with your finding of gross negligence, and what I'm citing to the Court are the activities -
THE COURT: I never mentioned the Franks -
MR. HENNESSEY: I’m sorry?
THE COURT:
Never mentioned the Franks hearing, never mentioned the motions, sir.
MR. HENNESSEY: Okay. You mentioned the transport orders. Unfortunately, the public and I - I was not allowed in representing Mr. Baldwin, and unfortunately, the public and I aren't privy to the recording of the session outside the presence of
Mr. Allen. He has a right to be present at every critical stage of the proceedings. When the Court coerces a withdrawal or quitting, that's a critical stage of the proceedings. He wasn't present.
And I'd be happy to address each and every point that you think constitutes gross negligence. I've practiced criminal defense for 40 years. I understand and know in detail what these two lawyers have done on behalf of Mr. Allen has been nothing but zealous representation.
So thank you - I have no expectation you'll change your mind -for allowing us to make a more complete record about your finding of gross negligence in disregard for Mr. Allen and unfairness to Mr. Baldwin and unfairness to Mr. Rozzi.
THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Hennessy.
MR. HENNESSEY: Thank you, Judge.”
JG needs to recuse herself, this type of behavior from a judge is embarrassing. She is making this a charade. It is best for everyone if the Jan 2024 trial date stands and she is not judge over the case. JMO MOO. Pics of the pages quoted from official court transcript also attached below.
Post in thread 'IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #170'
IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #170