"Jersey" and MW #2

[In da Middle]

So lemme see if I got this correct, the phone guys wife. Was she the one who was drinking with Deb on the front stoop?

Thanks IDM, has there been any connection between the phone guy and/or his wife to Jersey?

She's the one.
So far there is no known connection, but this is what I am wondering also. Not necessarily just Jersey himself, but anybody connected to MW and/or her phonemates.

 

[Cazzie]

The charge against Jersey isn't "confidential." The original charge by the prosecutor has been superseded by an indictment by a grand jury. The "confidential" doesn't mean he's working out a deal etc etc. I don't know why Vinelink says that. But I can tell you what casenet (which is Missouri's court record online system) tells me. It just means the prosecutor apparently took the case against Tanko to a grand jury who then "approved" the original charge.

ETA: Adding -01 doesn't mean anything "big." It's how the system works. The only thing I don't know is it typical to take property crimes to a grand jury in Clay County or did Dan White, prosecutor, treat this case differently because of the possible connection to Lisa Irwin. In Jackson County (the county I'm primarily familar with) a property crime case would not go to a grand jury but since Jackson County includes most of Kansas City, and KC has had 101 homicides so far this year, well it's not practical to use a grand jury for property crimes in Jackson County.

What does "-01" indicate then?

Was there any significance to Jersey's hearing being set for 11/13 (I think?) and then changed to 11/21 or 11/22? Or did his attorney get a continuance (and if so, would the reason be documented for us to see?), or was it some other scheduling issue, or ? ?

 

[Peliman]

She's the one.
So far there is no known connection, but this is what I am wondering also. Not necessarily just Jersey himself, but anybody connected to MW and/or her phonemates.

Thanks, I'm going to sleep on it tonight. Just working on theory here.

Appreciated

 

[DeAnn]

What does "-01" indicate then?

Was there any significance to Jersey's hearing being set for 11/13 (I think?) and then changed to 11/21 or 11/22? Or did his attorney get a continuance (and if so, would the reason be documented for us to see?), or was it some other scheduling issue, or ? ?

Please see my previous posts. The -01 typically in the KC area represents that a grand jury indictment has superseded the original charge by the prosecutor (the thinking being that you've been charged by your peers rather than the prosecutor).

Assuming that's the case here, the prosecutor would know they were taking the case to a grand jury, which issued the indictment on Nov. 15. There would be no need for a Nov. 13 hearing because the indictment would be forthcoming (prosecutor knows when a grand jury is meeting and what cases will be taken) and would become the new case and the clock starts ticking fresh. The arraignment is set for tomorrow at 8:30 a.m. on the -01 case.


The only reason I cannot say definitely that the -01 case for Tanko was issued by a grand jury is the docket list in casenet doesn't say that. I know a grand jury was meeting then and the dates match up. BUT....the prosecutor could have decided for whatever reason to re-charge and supersede with his own charge and not taken it to a grand jury. But it's the exact same charge just for whatever reason superseded by -01. Hope this helps. I'm very tired and don't think I'm explaining this well.

 

[hambirg]

Please see my previous posts. The -01 typically in the KC area represents that a grand jury indictment has superseded the original charge by the prosecutor (the thinking being that you've been charged by your peers rather than the prosecutor).

Assuming that's the case here, the prosecutor would know they were taking the case to a grand jury, which issued the indictment on Nov. 15. There would be no need for a Nov. 13 hearing because the indictment would be forthcoming (prosecutor knows when a grand jury is meeting and what cases will be taken) and would become the new case and the clock starts ticking fresh. The arraignment is set for tomorrow at 8:30 a.m. on the -01 case.


The only reason I cannot say definitely that the -01 case for Tanko was issued by a grand jury is the docket list in casenet doesn't say that. I know a grand jury was meeting then and the dates match up. BUT....the prosecutor could have decided for whatever reason to re-charge and supersede with his own charge and not taken it to a grand jury. But it's the exact same charge just for whatever reason superseded by -01. Hope this helps. I'm very tired and don't think I'm explaining this well.

No, I think you did just fine.

I still don't totally get it, but kind of. The -01 usually just means a case went to the grand jury. It would be weird in Kansas City proper for a property crime to go to the grand jury, but this is Clay county and Jersey might be a player in a big case, so the prosecutor may have went with the grand jury for those reasons. Am I close? :lol:

My question is could this possibly just be stalling a little bit too?

 

[DeAnn]

Cazzie, it means to me these things to take into account and summarize legitimately somehow. I throw posts out to get answers to stuff I don't know and many times get that answer here and appreciate it. I post as many facts when I find them but there's always someone usually on top of things other than myself. I do follow court dockets and bookings pretty much but these counties and the state are different just like all the other states systems. Learn something new everyday.

But per his old docket that I've posted a few times, sometimes in just updated form, here's what I can state I remember from my posts.

-Jersey had a warrant out on him 10/13/11
-He was arrested 10/14/11
-Charged with the tampering charge
-had court then appointed a public defender
-motions filed hmmm, would have to check my old posts for that
-court date 11/15/11, last I read that day was he was to be disposed.
-later that night the original docket was gone and replaced apparently with this xxxxxxxx -01 case number that was the same case number that MOVANS (MOVANS=MO.'s vinelink notification system on imates if you sign up for it to be notified in reagards to status of the inmate if there's a new court date or the prisoners being moved, etc..) sent me an email notification for that the original case number was confidential.

That's hinky to me and glad people are posting what they know. Thanks DeAnn for the info too.

A court clerk could have simply keyed in the wrong code.

I had a friend murdered. Killer was charged. I'm following along daily in casenet. Going to court hearings etc. Then grand jury indicts. Poof. The information goes "confidential" and get an error message that it's been sealed. What? Huh? Why sealed? i have a sleepless night imaging all sorts of things. Look into it and a clerk keyed the wrong entry. Once alerted to the issue, it was quickly fixed. Sometimes it's as simple as that.

 

[Dr. Know?]

A court clerk could have simply keyed in the wrong code.

I had a friend murdered. Killer was charged. I'm following along daily in casenet. Going to court hearings etc. Then grand jury indicts. Poof. The information goes "confidential" and get an error message that it's been sealed. What? Huh? Why sealed? i have a sleepless night imaging all sorts of things. Look into it and a clerk keyed the wrong entry. Once alerted to the issue, it was quickly fixed. Sometimes it's as simple as that.

Nah, I think with the events updated on the dockets, it's correct. Not a keying error. I have seen shady things on dockets, I've seen errors, but nah. I have felt he gave some info since the 15th since the last docket entry on his older docket was him being disposed. I just wish I was a mouse and in that courtroom tomorrow.

I'll be starting our TG baking/prep though about 1300 miles away..

Hope something happens soon and Lisa is found.

 

[Dr. Know?]

Docket update. That's out there pretty far for next court date, not unusual, just won't be very telling.

11/23/2011 Jury Trial Scheduled Scheduled For: 04/09/2012; 9:00 AM ; LARRY DALE HARMAN; Clay

Pre-trial Conference Scheduled Scheduled For: 03/30/2012; 8:15 AM ; LARRY DALE HARMAN; Clay

Motion for Discovery
Filed By: KATE E. NOLAND

Arraignment Held
Comes now State by Assistant Prosecuting Attorney and defendant in person and by attorney, Lance. Defendant arraigned and defendant enters plea of not guilty. Cause continued to April 9, 2012, at 9:00 am for trial setting. Cause set for pre-trial at 8:15 am on March 30, 2012. LDH
Scheduled For: 11/23/2011; 8:30 AM ; LARRY DALE HARMAN; Clay

https://www.courts.mo.gov/casenet/cases/charges.do

 

[DeAnn]

Docket update. That's out there pretty far for next court date, not unusual, just won't be very telling.

11/23/2011 Jury Trial Scheduled Scheduled For: 04/09/2012; 9:00 AM ; LARRY DALE HARMAN; Clay

Pre-trial Conference Scheduled Scheduled For: 03/30/2012; 8:15 AM ; LARRY DALE HARMAN; Clay

Motion for Discovery
Filed By: KATE E. NOLAND

Arraignment Held
Comes now State by Assistant Prosecuting Attorney and defendant in person and by attorney, Lance. Defendant arraigned and defendant enters plea of not guilty. Cause continued to April 9, 2012, at 9:00 am for trial setting. Cause set for pre-trial at 8:15 am on March 30, 2012. LDH
Scheduled For: 11/23/2011; 8:30 AM ; LARRY DALE HARMAN; Clay

https://www.courts.mo.gov/casenet/cases/charges.do

April is the trial date. There obviously will be status conferences etc between now and then.

Jersey was in court today. His attorney says he is not a suspect in baby Lisa's disappearance.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/16112553/attorney-says-tanko-not-suspect-in-baby-lisa-case

 

[natsound]

April is the trial date. There obviously will be status conferences etc between now and then.

Jersey was in court today. His attorney says he is not a suspect in baby Lisa's disappearance.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/16112553/attorney-says-tanko-not-suspect-in-baby-lisa-case

From the article above.... why would this be necessary:

The tampering charge was initially filed last month against Tanko, but the case was refiled by Clay County Prosecutor Dan White on Nov. 15.

 

[In da Middle]

Actually in this article the attorney does NOT say he is not a suspect, just that the attorney is not treating him as a suspect.

But his public defender, Horton Lance, said he is not treating his client as a suspect in the disappearance of baby Lisa

Nowhere does it say he is not a suspect. In fact it goes on to quote LE as still saying NOBODY is cleared.That sure is a funny way for a defense attorney to speak.

 

[Detective Klimpt]

:banghead: The docket history for Jersey is confusing to me. It looks like all the charges have to do with 'tampering'. Is it possible this all started with one tampering charge back in 2008 and then each time he broke parole a new charge number was initiated? It's not relevant to this case; just curious.

Does Jersey have to stay in the slammer until April 2012 or is there bond on him?

 

[natsound]

The charge against Jersey isn't "confidential." The original charge by the prosecutor has been superseded by an indictment by a grand jury. The "confidential" doesn't mean he's working out a deal etc etc. I don't know why Vinelink says that. But I can tell you what casenet (which is Missouri's court record online system) tells me. It just means the prosecutor apparently took the case against Tanko to a grand jury who then "approved" the original charge.

ETA: Adding -01 doesn't mean anything "big." It's how the system works. The only thing I don't know is it typical to take property crimes to a grand jury in Clay County or did Dan White, prosecutor, treat this case differently because of the possible connection to Lisa Irwin. In Jackson County (the county I'm primarily familar with) a property crime case would not go to a grand jury but since Jackson County includes most of Kansas City, and KC has had 101 homicides so far this year, well it's not practical to use a grand jury for property crimes in Jackson County.

So we still don't know why a "tampering with a vehicle" crime would go to a grand jury? Is this a felony charge?

 

[katydid23]

She's the one.
So far there is no known connection, but this is what I am wondering also. Not necessarily just Jersey himself, but anybody connected to MW and/or her phonemates.

Isn't SB really young. I thought I had read that she was only 21 or so. Is that correct?

 

[DeAnn]

So we still don't know why a "tampering with a vehicle" crime would go to a grand jury? Is this a felony charge?

It did not go to a grand jury. Yes, it's a felony charge. The information is in the story. Hope this helps.

 

[In da Middle]

Isn't SB really young. I thought I had read that she was only 21 or so. Is that correct?

I don't really know. I was thinking more like 23-25. But that was total assumption and based on her facebook friends ages.

 

[natsound]

It did not go to a grand jury. Yes, it's a felony charge. The information is in the story. Hope this helps.

What does this mean then?

The charge against Jersey isn't "confidential." The original charge by the prosecutor has been superseded by an indictment by a grand jury.

 

[jadejazzkayla]

from link ---> Tanko was arrested Oct. 14 in connection with an Oct. 13 incident....The tampering charge was initially filed last month against Tanko, but the case was refiled by Clay County Prosecutor Dan White on Nov. 15.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/16112553/attorney-says-tanko-not-suspect-in-baby-lisa-case

The original case number is 11CYCR03875. From the Oct 14 arrest.
The updated case number is 11CYCR03875-01. From the Nov. 15 refiling.

 

[In da Middle]

It did not go to a grand jury. Yes, it's a felony charge. The information is in the story. Hope this helps.

The charge against Jersey isn't "confidential." The original charge by the prosecutor has been superseded by an indictment by a grand jury. The "confidential" doesn't mean he's working out a deal etc etc. I don't know why Vinelink says that. But I can tell you what casenet (which is Missouri's court record online system) tells me. It just means the prosecutor apparently took the case against Tanko to a grand jury who then "approved" the original charge.

ETA: Adding -01 doesn't mean anything "big." It's how the system works. The only thing I don't know is it typical to take property crimes to a grand jury in Clay County or did Dan White, prosecutor, treat this case differently because of the possible connection to Lisa Irwin. In Jackson County (the county I'm primarily familar with) a property crime case would not go to a grand jury but since Jackson County includes most of Kansas City, and KC has had 101 homicides so far this year, well it's not practical to use a grand jury for property crimes in Jackson County.

BBM I *think* this is the info natsound is questioning.

 

[natsound]

BBM I *think* this is the info natsound is questioning.

Yep, that's it.