JLM Charged in 2005 Farifax Rape Case

[MJPeony]

Do we know WHY he is solitary? In my limited understanding, when someone is placed in solitary it's b/c they are either suicidal or they have had serious threats made to them by other prisoners....

 

[MJPeony]

It seems to me, that the prosecution is most likely not going to offer any "deals" in this case. Therefore, the only option that Jessie's lawyers have is to plead "guilty" which will most likely end up with a maximum sentence, or plead "not guilty" and worst case get the same maximum sentence that he would have gotten if he plead "guilty". In other words, there is no up side to pleading "guilty" so they may as well come up with the best defense strategy they can and give it a shot. I can't imagine what the defense strategy will be since they don't appear to be going for "guilty by reason of insanity", so it should be interesting. I too hope it will be broadcast on TV.

Yes. This will be interesting to see what they actually argue in court (defense). I can understand the "what do we have to lose" approach to a certain extent (and you're probably right), but when there is DNA evidence..... oy. I'd think his counsel would be embarrassed to try to argue this. Is it possible they would try to argue he was framed? Oy again. Very interested to see or read how they defend forensic evidence.

 

[ILOKAL]

Does anyone know what a "discovery motion or discovery order" is? Thanks to anyone with more legal knowledge and background.

A motion is a request asking a judge to issue a ruling or order on a legal matter. Usually, one side files a motion, along with notice of the motion to the attorney for the opposing party, the other side files a written response, and the court holds a hearing, at which the parties give brief oral arguments. Other motions are decided by the written submissions alone, without a hearing. However, during a trial or a hearing, an oral motion may be permitted. Then the court issues a ruling (order) which approves or denies the motion. Motions are often made before trials to resolve procedural and preliminary issues, and may be made after trials to enforce or modify judgments. Motions are made in court all the time for many purposes such as to continue a trial to a later date, to get a modification of an order, for temporary child support, for a judgment, for dismissal of the opposing party's case, for a rehearing, for sanctions, and many other reasons. A motion on a factual matter usually will be filed with a supporting affidavit.

A defense motion for discovery is a request that the state turn over all evidence, be it incriminating or exculpatory, for the defendant. Some states have reciprocal discovery. Oh, IMVHO.

 

[ILOKAL]

Do we know WHY he is solitary? In my limited understanding, when someone is placed in solitary it's b/c they are either suicidal or they have had serious threats made to them by other prisoners....

Isn't it also used as discipline for those who are uncooperative or unmanageable?

 

[MJPeony]

Isn't it also used as discipline for those who are uncooperative or unmanageable?

Yes, apparently- I just did a little research. But I believe it was stated in MSM at one point that he was "cooperative" or "cooperating" or something to that effect (of course, that is a bit confusing as to what exactly that means). But my guess is that being unmanageable isn't the reason. Apparently there are a bunch of reasons why a person is put into solitary confinement. Including mental illness. And the conditions of the environment for isolation vary from prison to prison as well apparently. Here's just but one link. I lol'd when I read the part about the Rastafarian men... Given the previous musings on these boards a while back about why he had dreads Although I highly doubt he's refusing to cut his hair, it is an interesting thing to imagine.


http://solitarywatch.com/facts/faq/
"In Virginia, a group of Rastafarian men were placed in solitary–some for more than a decade–because they refused to cut their hair on religious grounds."

 

[SolverGameChanger]

Yes. This will be interesting to see what they actually argue in court (defense). I can understand the "what do we have to lose" approach to a certain extent (and you're probably right), but when there is DNA evidence..... oy. I'd think his counsel would be embarrassed to try to argue this. Is it possible they would try to argue he was framed? Oy again. Very interested to see or read how they defend forensic evidence.

I found this explanation of "why plead guilty"

http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2012/02/why-do-guilty-people-plead-not-guilty.html

So, forcing the prosecuters to prove their case "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the right of the defendant

I remember how the defense lawyer for OJ had OJ try on the black glove the perp had apparently used and which had the victims blood all over it. When it did not fit well, it placed a clearly visual sense of reasonable doubt that OJ had anything to do with the murder of his wife and her boyfriend. Even though there was a history of violence in OJ's relationship with his wife and a majority of the public had set him as guilty he was set free. Later, a jury awarded the wife's family a civil case judgement.

All that JLM's lawyer needs is to demonstrate that other people might be involved and that JLM's DNA make him familiar with the defendant but they may have mistaken him for another potential perp. Or they can pick at the manner in which evidence is taken, testified, and judgement and ethics of the jury to create a mess of confusion. So, why not plead "not guilty" and then begin to agitate the prosecutor to make errors and confuse the jury with attempts to place holes in the claims. It will depend on the Judges ability to keep order etc.

In a case that I was on, there was a video taken of the defendant failing the DWI tests. It was obvious he was guilty. The defense lawyer began to pick at the methods and validity of the way all the tests were performed. Even though those test were performed in the right manner on video, the defense lawyer poked at issues how the police flashing lights and wind could skew the results. In the end, the defendant won as a result that the jury was convinced "police" often skew the interpretation of results with their biased judgement and that the police officer claim was not visible on the video. They didn't trust the actual testimony of the police officer and didn't consider that the video perspective provided a skewed view of the actual situation up close and personal. Even the defendent's blood test was just below the limit for being intoxicated after an hour trip to the station. He denied a breath test at the scene. When I reviewed the defendants court history after the case was closed, I noted that the DWI case was the third event. A third event was a criminal offense. We were not allow to consider or know about prior DWI events. This would have skewed the result but the defendant got away without a suspended license, jail time, and several thousand of dollars in fines. The jury was worried about ruining the defendant's life if they were wrong.

What if the jury is worried about the death penalty ? or that others might have been helping the poor stupid, impressionable JLM ?

This is about JLM, so I hope my examples do not get too much attention. If I didn't make a good point, please excuse.

 

[SteveP]

I don't know much about law and defense, etc. I'm trying to think what the defense's strategy will be. DNA doesn't lie. I would assume it's skin and blood that was under her nails and the victim is going to testify. Yet, he's pleading not guilty and they're not asking for a psych evaluation. Anyone want to weigh in or speculate?

Defense will probably start by excusing the maximum number of qualified jurors that they deem will not be sympathetic to their client that they can during voir dire questioning, in hopes of getting at least one or two who either do not understand the validity of DNA (and yes there are many still), or getting one or two who may have biases against LE. During trial, they will probably attempt to poke holes wherever they can...will probably begin by questioning the victim's recall and ability to identify the perp nine years after the fact. After such a length of time, LE officers called to testify will surely have to rely on their reports taken at the time, and defense attorneys will pounce on any little discrepancies between reports and memory they can. Ultimately, when it comes down to DNA, they will probably argue that it was not handled properly and was somehow through collection contaminated, so can't be trusted. I think this case SHOULD be a slam dunk, but I have been surprised by jurors before. All JMO, as usual.

ETA...No way will they put JLM on the stand, IMO

 

[CatchingClues]

Snipped by CC:
Anyone read Into why it seemed he wants to go back to c-ville with urgency? Because camblos wants ultimate control?[/QUOTE]
My first thought was so that any one who visits him won't have to travel as far. JMO

 

[Heroine]

Why, then, haven't they requested a med eval on him including shaving to look for just that? Seems like it would be too late now. Or can they not do that as part of the investigation?

I don't think that they would have any legal right to do such and even if they did you know he would just make up some off the wall story...after all he did plead NOT GUILTY AS INSANE AS THAT SEEMS! Like anyone is going to believe him.

 

[jbowman55]

I don't think that they would have any legal right to do such and even if they did you know he would just make up some off the wall story...after all he did plead NOT GUILTY AS INSANE AS THAT SEEMS! Like anyone is going to believe him.

It has also occurred to me that the defense may have JM plead "not guilty" as leverage to get the CA to negotiate for a lighter sentence for JM. A trial will be as expensive as the defense can make it, could possibly drag on for a while, puts the victim through h*ll what with having to testify to every little detail and submit herself to such personal questioning in a public venue. This is not to even mention the difficulty and expense associated with bringing the victim back to the US, probably with other family members for support, and putting them up for the duration of the trial, however long that might be. When you think about it, it's easy to see how complicated and difficult a trial would be for everyone involved...

...except, of course, JM. He gets free representation, gets to go on "road trips," gets his three hots and a cot...although what he's getting, well, who would want that?

Anyway, if the defense "threatens" a trial, maybe CA suddenly becomes more open to discussion?

All imo. Also mo, and please, no offense to lawyers present, that one must get pretty calculating in one's own mind to be able to keep up with the machinations of a legal team. As I said before, any trick in the book, according to the LETTER of the law, not necessarily the spirit of it.

 

[Charlie Chan]

I wonder if JLM pled "Not Guilty" against the advice of his attorneys.

 

[Evie Ivy Over]

Like most everyone else, it was surprising to me to hear the "not guilty" plea from JM today! Primarily because of the DNA; but, honestly, over the years I have heard some really bad stories about what turned out to be "false positives". Anyway, I saw this today and I think it would possibly give a shred of hope to someone who would want to fight the type of charges he is facing:

http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/c...cle_a96357c4-6626-11e4-977a-0017a43b2370.html

November 6, 2014 9:45 pm
"A state forensic analysis conducted last month concludes the chances of the DNA profile matching someone other than Jesse Leroy Matthew Jr. are “1 in greater than 7.2 billion,” the latter figure equivalent to the entire world population.

While the forensic analysis does not explicitly match Matthew’s DNA with that of the 2005 attacker, the probability of any other match is “pretty darn remote,” according to UCLA law professor Jennifer Mnookin, an expert in forensic science and DNA profiling.

“It is standard practice in some labs never to say [DNA] absolutely came from any one person,” Mnookin said. “Because fundamentally, it’s probabilistic evidence — they’re being more scientifically accurate.”

The link leaves Matthew’s defense with few options, including either challenging the collection and storage of the DNA evidence or the expertise of the analyst who uncovered the link, said local defense attorney Scott Goodman, who is not working the case.

“The defense may get their own expert to see if there is a different conclusion,” Goodman said. “That’s the only shot you have.”

I wonder how close DNA profiles are among family members? With the odds of anyone else matching being so high, it would seem that a familial DNA connection could totally ruled out, but....it is not an exact science, so who knows?

 

[ILOKAL]

Like most everyone else, it was surprising to me to hear the "not guilty" plea from JM today! Primarily because of the DNA; but, honestly, over the years I have heard some really bad stories about what turned out to be "false positives". Anyway, I saw this today and I think it would possibly give a shred of hope to someone who would want to fight the type of charges he is facing:

http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/c...cle_a96357c4-6626-11e4-977a-0017a43b2370.html

November 6, 2014 9:45 pm
"A state forensic analysis conducted last month concludes the chances of the DNA profile matching someone other than Jesse Leroy Matthew Jr. are “1 in greater than 7.2 billion,” the latter figure equivalent to the entire world population.

While the forensic analysis does not explicitly match Matthew’s DNA with that of the 2005 attacker, the probability of any other match is “pretty darn remote,” according to UCLA law professor Jennifer Mnookin, an expert in forensic science and DNA profiling.

“It is standard practice in some labs never to say [DNA] absolutely came from any one person,” Mnookin said. “Because fundamentally, it’s probabilistic evidence — they’re being more scientifically accurate.”

The link leaves Matthew’s defense with few options, including either challenging the collection and storage of the DNA evidence or the expertise of the analyst who uncovered the link, said local defense attorney Scott Goodman, who is not working the case.

“The defense may get their own expert to see if there is a different conclusion,” Goodman said. “That’s the only shot you have.”

I wonder how close DNA profiles are among family members? With the odds of anyone else matching being so high, it would seem that a familial DNA connection could totally ruled out, but....it is not an exact science, so who knows?

Is Matthew charged with rape by foreign object in the Fairfax case? I guess there's no seminal fluid DNA. I wonder why?

 

[Heroine]

http://www.wric.com/story/27390756/should-dna-testing-be-expanded-to-include-misdemeanors

Albemarle County Sheriff Chip Harding has been pushing for more DNA testing for a while. He says there are now several lawmakers interested in coming up with a bill he thinks will help prevent and solve crimes.
Jesse Matthew has been arrested in connection to Graham's disappearance. His DNA has also been linked to a 2005 rape in Fairfax County. Four years ago Matthew was arrested and convicted of trespassing, but his crime was not serious enough to warrant taking his DNA. Harding says if his DNA had been taken he would have been connected to the rape in Fairfax in 2010 and possibly off the streets.
“If convicted, more than likely he would have gotten a substantial sentence and he would have been sitting in a jail cell when Hannah came down the mall,” said Harding.

 

[Heroine]

Is Matthew charged with rape by foreign object in the Fairfax case? I guess there's no seminal fluid DNA. I wonder why?

Well remember he was scared off by a passerby? Maybe there just was no seminal fluid DNA as I'm not sure he got that far if you know what I mean.

 

[ILOKAL]

Well remember he was scared off by a passerby? Maybe there just was no seminal fluid DNA as I'm not sure he got that far if you know what I mean.

Hmmm, I wonder if that has something to do with his not guilty plea?

 

[Heroine]

RAW: Jesse Matthew pleads not guilty to charges in 2005 Fairfax rape case

http://www.nbc12.com/clip/10850451/...t-guilty-to-charges-in-2005-fairfax-rape-case

...notice how all the deputies are keeping their eyes on him. He can't even say not guilty without blinking his eyes.

 

[Heroine]

I wonder if JLM pled "Not Guilty" against the advice of his attorneys.

I still think it's partially all about grandma....lol...i mean I think his main concern is how other people view him and of course he can't just admit to trying to kill and rape a woman.

 

[SolVol]

When considering this case, do not forget that this was a VIOLENT PHYSICAL ASSAULT AND ATTEMPTED CAPITAL MURDER.

The Fairfax rape victim was brutally, PHYSICALLY and sexually assaulted. This was no mere rape-only, sexual assault.

There was intentionally inflicted extensive physical damage - as witnesses attested.

DO NOT allow your mind to gloss over the true nature of this attack.

This was the act of a much larger trained champion wrestler in a sudden surprise-attack against a much smaller untrained, unsuspecting person.

The male was by the evidence of this and other attacks, fueled by hateful uncontrolled rage against all females.

The Fairfax female did not stand a chance, and likely would have died, except for the intervention/interruption of the attack by a concerned citizen.

Morgan Harrington was very petite and Hannah Graham was evidently impaired in some way that she was not before she encountered JLM. Neither of them were able to resist or escape from the practiced skills of this cunning and vicious perpetrator.

 

[ILOKAL]

I still think it's partially all about grandma....lol...i mean I think his main concern is how other people view him and of course he can't just admit to trying to kill and rape a woman.

I speculated the same early on. I "think" he may end up murdering his victims as an attempt to clean up his messes so as not to get in trouble. That just might be how his mind works.