JLM Charged in 2005 Farifax Rape Case

[Emaa]

Thank you for this. Camblos looks like he'd rather be having his teeth drilled.

My first impression was constipated.

 

[Emaa]

I didn't see the hearing as all that contentious. Just attorneys doing what attorneys do lol.

I think Camblos asking to be appointed lead (or sole) counsel and referencing his motion were just ways to slow things down. But the judge, CA and PD were on to him. He doesn't want a speedy trial. Too bad the judge and CA are determined to do just that.

 

[2Hope4]

I don't think Cambols wants JLM talking to anyone else about the cases! If he can keep JLM from talking to others, then he can control any information leaked, and control the way he runs the defense. He stated it was a family matter that his representing JLM. No idea what history there is there. But he if he can get the publicity he wants from these trials, and a thumb in the nose to those he ran against and lost, and he writes a book about the JLM cases with his insider info...well, he can retire and leave the money to whoever he wants.

And it doesn't matter if those attornies get along or not. They didn't in Jodi Arias trial. Nurmi practically begged to be released as her attorney. He obviously didn't want to represent her, but as a Public Defender, was stuck with his rotation.

Cambols on the other hand is NOT in the rotation for Public Defender in Fairfax. A private attorney should be paid privately, or work pro bono. Otherwise all defendants that can't afford an attorney can pick the best around, and make the state pay for it. Can't have it both ways Cambols. Either JLM has the money to pay you, or he doesn't. BUT, Cambols did state a modest amount had been given to him to retain him! Soooo where's the moolah??

I don't think JLM is going to go along with being controlled forever. Being a rapist, he wants the control, and fear factor to punish others. Being on the receiving end of his terror has got to be rough for him. Which makes me smile. Nope, you won't eat when you want or what you want, you'll have what the jail is serving and when it gets to your cell. If it's cold by then, suck up and deal! Frankly I don't believe they should even get warm meals. Them being fed is more than our homeless veterans are receiving!

well as usual JMO!

 

[Bravo]

Here are some of my questions on this. Camblos really wants to represent Matthew in all cases it seems. Why?

The Fairfax case, afaik, does not warrant the death penalty. Hannah's and Morgan's murder probably would. Could Camblos believe he can get an innocent verdict in the Fairfax case? If he did, then would that negate the links between the Fairfax case and the Harrington case, thus making it more difficult to get a conviction in the Harrington case and the Graham case?

Dare I even ask this...but is there even a glimmer of a chance that Matthew is innocent of one/all of the crimes? (Please, no rotten eggs & tomatoes). The Fairfax case seems a bit out of his MO.

I guess I'm naiive about defense attorneys. By now, a experience attorney like Camblos must either know Matthew is guilty as sin or else he thinks Matthew is innocent. If he believes Matthew is guilty, why would he want to even get involved in the defense? He's older, isn't getting paid a lot, doesn't need the attention. So why?

He thrives on a challenge?

 

[MJPeony]

He thrives on a challenge?

This, and I also think he likes the attention. He was sure to point out in his appearance today that the case had significant "notoriety".

 

[jamicat]

Here are some of my questions on this. Camblos really wants to represent Matthew in all cases it seems. Why?

The Fairfax case, afaik, does not warrant the death penalty. Hannah's and Morgan's murder probably would. Could Camblos believe he can get an innocent verdict in the Fairfax case? If he did, then would that negate the links between the Fairfax case and the Harrington case, thus making it more difficult to get a conviction in the Harrington case and the Graham case?

Dare I even ask this...but is there even a glimmer of a chance that Matthew is innocent of one/all of the crimes? (Please, no rotten eggs & tomatoes). The Fairfax case seems a bit out of his MO.

I guess I'm naiive about defense attorneys. By now, a experience attorney like Camblos must either know Matthew is guilty as sin or else he thinks Matthew is innocent. If he believes Matthew is guilty, why would he want to even get involved in the defense? He's older, isn't getting paid a lot, doesn't need the attention. So why?

A glimmer of a chance? Highly unlikely with this case, as it's pretty open and shut. There is likely a direct hit with the DNA, buccal swab and rape kit result. But could he be found innocent or have charges dismissed? Yes. If the victim doesn't show up, that is a possibility. Doesn't mean he didn't do it. The attempted murder charge might not hold, depending on the injuries and the testimony of medical experts. And maybe at that time, with that victim, he was not attempting to murder her.

The other two cases? Depends on the evidence that LE has. Though I think it looks mighty likely, when evidence has to presented in court, it has to meet certain standards and if there is reasonable doubt, the jury is instructed to to find "not guilty". Some of the other threads go into what we really can't prove, unless LE has the forensic evidence. We can spin all we want, as can the DA. But the proof has to be there. There is an article out there where some attorneys have been discussing these cases, and the consensus seems to be this is the strongest case. Of course some very good DNA finds on Hannah could change that. But notice that there isn't any movement to charge JM with the MH case. All things equal, the most severe cases get charged first so that if the sentence is tough enough, there may be no need to go through more trials which are expensive. JM has taken up a lot of Virgina's resources as well as from a lot of people.

I don't believe it for an instant as an out for JM, but there are situations in closed communities where DNA evidence can be not so exclusive. My husband's area, for instance, which has been a secluded area for a very long time. When you have a Warren Taylor Sloane, Sloane Taylor Warren, and Taylor Sloane Warren, not only are the family names the same, but they may well be DNA identical. Some cursory looks at the family tree show a lot of intermarrying. That's why familial DNA tracking can be dicey in certain situations.

I thought the same about the Fairfax case, being out of MO. I would not have been shocked if there were no match on the DNA, but there is, which is why the case is moving forward. Apparently, JM is an out and out rapist who will grab a someone, assault her and rape her if the opportunity presents. Hopefully, LE is checking for matches on such rape reports. He may have done this other times as well.

It is possible that JM took Hannah to where ever she wanted him to drop her off and then he just went home, leaving her there, alive and unsullied. Then someone else killed her and dropped her body off where it was found. Does it sound likely to you? Or she asked to be dropped off at the place where she was found, and so JM did, leaving her just fine. And he didn't want to tell LE because he had no proof, and being an AA male in the south involved with a white woman's disappearance has not had fair historical outcomes. At what point it becomes unreasonable for judge/jury to believe this, I don't know. But if there isn't a trace of certain DNA to prove JM was where Hannah was found, or that he harmed Hannah, it might be a problem to get a guilty verdict. The Alexis Murphy case came in with a guilty verdict for RAT, because even without her body, so much blood, so much evidence that there was a physical fight with hair, blood, semen, all kinds of DNA in RAT's place, on clothes, furniture, etc. it was beyond reasonable doubt that the girl was killed by him. There has to be a preponderance of evidence to get the verdicts. The Casey Anthony case, the OJ case are two well known ones where the jury did not think the state proved the cases.

 

[SolVol]

Here are some of my questions on this. Camblos really wants to represent Matthew in all cases it seems. Why?

The Fairfax case, afaik, does not warrant the death penalty. Hannah's and Morgan's murder probably would. Could Camblos believe he can get an innocent verdict in the Fairfax case? If he did, then would that negate the links between the Fairfax case and the Harrington case, thus making it more difficult to get a conviction in the Harrington case and the Graham case?

Dare I even ask this...but is there even a glimmer of a chance that Matthew is innocent of one/all of the crimes? (Please, no rotten eggs & tomatoes). The Fairfax case seems a bit out of his MO.

I guess I'm naiive about defense attorneys. By now, a experience attorney like Camblos must either know Matthew is guilty as sin or else he thinks Matthew is innocent. If he believes Matthew is guilty, why would he want to even get involved in the defense? He's older, isn't getting paid a lot, doesn't need the attention. So why?

The only way/s JLM could be innocent is:
1. He has an identical, but evil twin brother that no one knows about whose DNA is the same as poor good twin JLM's DNA.
2. The evil twin did the dastardly deeds or merely abducted the women and turned them over to an evil cartel of sadists who tortured and murdered the women, then handed the bodies back to the evil twin to dispose of in his own neighborhood.
3. The lab was not competent and made faulty identification of JLM's DNA one or more times.

IOW - he's not innocent. Quite the opposite.

 

[FindHG]

He thrives on a challenge?

Camblos has said that he has a history with the family, I think specifically in his interview with Spencer Hawes, so perhaps some sense of loyalty to them and the belief that innocent until proven guilty, it seems, if taken at his word. He has repeatedly referred to the publicity about his client, the perp, being tried by publicity. However, the very interesting "discreet" links between the cases that came up today would indicate a level of knowledge about evidence that ties them all together. He seems committed to defend the perp and seems to be going down the path of delay and obfuscation which any good defense attorney may try in a case like this, I would think. He has ties to the perp's "teddy bear" past. Perhaps for Camblos, it may not just be a defense of the perp in his heart and mind, it seems to me, so much as being of about the people touched by the fact that the "teddy bear" was actually a "marauding bear" as Gil Harrington put it.

 

[SolVol]

<snip> I guess I'm naiive about defense attorneys. By now, a experience attorney like Camblos must either know Matthew is guilty as sin or else he thinks Matthew is innocent. If he believes Matthew is guilty, why would he want to even get involved in the defense? He's older, isn't getting paid a lot, doesn't need the attention. So why?

Someone has suggested Camblos got coerced or intimidated into representing JM by someone within JM's family...that Camblos is afraid of JM and the family. The whole scene at the police station with JM, his mother and uncle, is puzzling. Usually the police do not find attorneys for people. People call their own attorneys.

The whole episode of JM and his coterie at the police station might have been intended to make a statement, a warning/threat.

 

[jamicat]

It's a known fact that defense attorneys love high profile cases. It is priceless (both literally and in the sense it is above any price) advertisement for them. They score some points, handle the case well, look good, and it can bring in a lot of business. They do not get guaranteed paychecks when they are out on their own, so they need to get a rep to make the money. I believe a poster on this forum who is an attorney, out and out predicted that JM would have no shortage of offers from attorneys to defend him Also a capital case is big time to get on the resume. A PD would love such a case, over the usual penny ante fare they get.

It might well be to Camblos's benefit that he is secondary on this case to the assigned PD, since this is a strong case, a certain win for the DA if the victim shows up in court. A less than optimal verdict here followed by a win in the other cases if they even go to trial would allow him to point the finger at a less experienced lawyer which PDs often are. It's to his benefit to be on this case since there are links to the other cases. Even he is saying that outright, IMO, because the info has already been publically announced, and I'm sure the results have been shown to him as the rep for the perp.

 

[jamicat]

Someone has suggested Camblos got coerced or intimidated into representing JM by someone within JM's family...that Camblos is afraid of JM and the family. The whole scene at the police station with JM, his mother and uncle, is puzzling. Usually the police do not find attorneys for people. People call their own attorneys.

The whole episode of JM and his coterie at the police station might have been intended to make a statement, a warning/threat.

Umm. Where did you read/hear that? According to Longo, when JM showed up and demanded an attorney, Longo just got him the first name on a list, and that name happened to be Camblos. He apparently has just recently gone into private practice having been a DA of sorts for a while. I don't know if he is an assigned PD for the charges in Hannah's case or doing it pro bono. It seems to me he was angling to be named PD for this case. I think the cases are going to take up a lot of his time, and he would want whatever payment he could get from the courts for his work.

 

[jamicat]

Here are some of my questions on this. Camblos really wants to represent Matthew in all cases it seems. Why?

I guess I'm naiive about defense attorneys. By now, a experience attorney like Camblos must either know Matthew is guilty as sin or else he thinks Matthew is innocent. If he believes Matthew is guilty, why would he want to even get involved in the defense? He's older, isn't getting paid a lot, doesn't need the attention. So why?

Respectfully edited for focus, and BBM.

This is a victim friendly forum, so the focus is on getting the alleged perp behind bars and the Defense attorney is at the same level as his client in the efforts made to get the accused off. But our system is an adversary system which requires that the accused has someone testing, questioning and going after every accusation, every bit of evidence against him. Without good defense attorneys, our system would not work. It is set up to provide such a defense for anyone who is accused.

We had a problem here in NY with the Leiby Kletzky case, where a little boy was picked up, killed and chopped into pieces. Caught the perp with the body parts, he admitted it. Lawyer on the case quit; said he couldn't represent such a horrible person, PD assigned was not very good at all to the point that the judge stepped in to admonish what a horrible job she was doing. Case was pled out for 1 charge of 2nd degree murder, 1 charge of 2nd degree kidnapping, and the state felt lucky to get it settled for that. He was sentenced to 40 years. Without good defense, a perp can get loose, case can be dismissed or a declared a mistrial to the expense of all of us. So the system needs good defense attorneys pushing hard at the DA.

 

[LaLaH]

I'm in the legal field. It can cost your average personal injury attorney in a large city close to a million a year in advertising on tv, radio, buses, billboards, phone books and internet. I can totally understand why JLM's family attorney is going to try to take these cases. It's national advertising, book deals, movie deals, tv interviews, maybe eventually a legal commentator role on a news show. But, and big but, can he afford to pay for all the expenses to try these cases if JLM's family doesn't pay? Experts, depos, forensic analyisis, etc all cost money. Plus giving up your regular paying business. Guess we'll see, but JLM may end up with public defender of this guy can't hang.

 

[FindHG]

Attorney seeks mental evaluation for Jesse Matthew
Brent Solomon of Richmond reports - Oct 31, 2014 7:50 PM EDT
http://www.nbc12.com/story/27174196/jesse-matthew-appears-in-fairfax-on-2005-rape-case

interviews with Ray Morrogh and Jim Camblos


Jesse Matthew Appears Via Video In Fairfax Court
Posted: Oct 31, 2014 5:54 PM EDT
Katie Brooke reports - Posted: Oct 31, 2014 5:54 PM EDT
http://www.wset.com/story/27178972/jesse-matthew-appears-via-video-in-fairfax-court

Suspect in Virginia student murder arraigned in separate assault case
Reuters
Reporting by John Clarke;
Editing by Frank McGurty and Eric Beech
http://www.oann.com/suspect-in-virginia-student-murder-arraigned-in-separate-assault-case/

 

[CoolJ]

OK I am obviously more confused by this than most of you. To put it simply why can't JM get the lawyer he wants if that lawyer is willing to work for him?
I'm not a legal guy at all, but it worries me.
Also, judge asked JM if he had a job at the time of his arrest and JM said No, which we know is not the case.

 

[FindHG]

I'm in the legal field. It can cost your average personal injury attorney in a large city close to a million a year in advertising on tv, radio, buses, billboards, phone books and internet. I can totally understand why JLM's family attorney is going to try to take these cases. It's national advertising, book deals, movie deals, tv interviews, maybe eventually a legal commentator role on a news show. But, and big but, can he afford to pay for all the expenses to try these cases if JLM's family doesn't pay? Experts, depos, forensic analyisis, etc all cost money. Plus giving up your regular paying business. Guess we'll see, but JLM may end up with public defender of this guy can't hang.

Great to have your in the field perspective. Thank you for pitching in.

It crossed my mind that if Camblos does indeed want a good defense and a way to mitigate costs, then why would he still try to defend him alone when a public defenders office would give more resources? Do you think it is just a matter of being first chair? Setting the perp up for a mistrial due to inadequate defense? Isn't it a defense attorney's prerogative to give his client the best defense possible and how could he do that alone?

 

[FindHG]

OK I am obviously more confused by this than most of you. To put it simply why can't JM get the lawyer he wants if that lawyer is willing to work for him?
I'm not a legal guy at all, but it worries me.
Also, judge asked JM if he had a job at the time of his arrest and JM said No, which we know is not the case.

Camblos was asking to be his state assigned defender in county where he doesn't practice by special order of the judge. If you recall, he did not want to be considered a privately hired attorney when Judge Dennis J. Smith asked, to the best of my knowledge, which isn't much.

 

[ILOKAL]

Someone has suggested Camblos got coerced or intimidated into representing JM by someone within JM's family...that Camblos is afraid of JM and the family. The whole scene at the police station with JM, his mother and uncle, is puzzling. Usually the police do not find attorneys for people. People call their own attorneys.

The whole episode of JM and his coterie at the police station might have been intended to make a statement, a warning/threat.

Although it has been rumored that JLM, et al went to the police station to ask for an attorney and was put in touch with Camblos, I thought I had read in actuality JLM was given a list of defense attorneys, he contacted Camblos who then came to the station and briefly met with him. JMO

 

[vthokies19]

The judge in Fairfax clearly is not wasting a single minute. The police have waited 9 years for someone and the victim 9 years for justice. There has to be overwhelming evidence against JM (DNA, eyewitness) is way more than enough but especially DNA. The fact Camblos is asking for evaluation proves to me he has accepted JM is going to be found guiltily on all charges in every jurisdiction and trying to salvage anything he can for JM to not get death penalty. JM will not get insanity. He held a job at UVA hospital, he graduated high school, went to 2 colleges and played sports. He is just evil. He is a cold calculated murderer.

I'm not worried about JM having a reason to appeal with the "fighting" among the defense attorneys. Simply put Camblos came out and said he was not representing JM for 2 days. The court said ok and found a PD, now Camblos changes his mind. Unfortunately thats not how it works and the judge is snippy with Camblos because he used to be the CA, he knows the rules. This trial will move fast (because the evidence is strong) and I expect JM to be found guilty on all charges and receive max sentence on all.

Albermarle County is not rushing to bring charges against JM, he has no chance on bail ever and they are building the cases for MH and HG. We will know more on Hannah's case in about a month, beginning of December. Morgan's case will go hand in hand with Hannah's but of course he will be tried separately. I hope he pleads guilty and saves the pain of going through a trial but since they death penalty will be on the table, not a chance he does that.

Hannah will be albemarle county. Can someone remind me if Morgans is in albermarle or charlottesville? Where was the farm she was on?

 

[SteveP]

OK I am obviously more confused by this than most of you. To put it simply why can't JM get the lawyer he wants if that lawyer is willing to work for him?
I'm not a legal guy at all, but it worries me.
Also, judge asked JM if he had a job at the time of his arrest and JM said No, which we know is not the case.

I worked for a company that had policies in place that you were considered to have voluntarily quit if you were absent 5 consecutive days without notifying your supervisor by calling in daily. Perhaps the hospital also had some such policies in place. Or maybe he just kinda knew they weren't gonna keep him on the payroll after he bolted for Texas and made national news. JMO