GUILTY KS - Keighley Alyea, 18, Overland Park, 30 Sept 2009

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Fairy1 said:
luvbeaches - Thank you so much for going to the courthouse and letting us know what you learned! I can't wait to see what happens next. These guys are a bunch of idiots. Guess that's not much of a surprise!
Click to expand...

They are a bunch of idiots. If I read the report correctly, Hilt texted BA telling her he was down the street from her. Duh. How many criminals get caught in a lie when they do this? He must not understand the concept of cell phones, cell phone towers and pings ... and how his movements can be tracked.

I really think they are all going to end up cutting plea deals ... at least Calbeck and Mattox. Hilt may hold out for a trial, but when it comes down to it, I think he'll take a deal also. MO and the Feds are waiting in the wings for him.

Jurisdiction issues isn't his big problem ... it's the fact that he killed a girl.
 
Also cannot see what his lawyers hoped to gain by moving the trial other than time....MO also has the DP and they actually carry it out. Doh!

luv you are the greatest!!
 
Lola said:
Also cannot see what his lawyers hoped to gain by moving the trial other than time....MO also has the DP and they actually carry it out. Doh!

luv you are the greatest!!
Click to expand...

Thanks, Lola! I only wish I completely understood what I was reading. :) MO will fry them all, that's for sure.

I still don't believe it's a coincidence that Cramm is Hilt's attorney.
 
The only thing I can come up with as far as changing jurisdictions is this:

When you kidnap someone, it's an additional charge if you carry them over state lines, correct?
So maybe if the defense can use their line about "she went willingly and wasn't kidnapped in KS" to get the jurisdiction changed, they can get any additional charge dropped for transporting her across state lines.

Not sure what good that will do when there are murder charges involved. But that's the only thing I could come up with. Also, I haven't kept up with this case very well, so my opinion is just FWIW.
 
Clearly I wasn't paying attention to your post luv..ooops. Wonder if the 5th person was this Santos character??
 
Nothing of interest for the other two, but looks as though Hilt will go to trial

03/05/2010 FILE STAMP 3/5/2010, ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL FILED, APPOINTMENT OF NECESSARY EXPERT SERVICES
03/05/2010 COUNT 1 21-3401 PLAINTIFF APPEARS BY HOWE AND RIEBLI,DEFENDANT APPEARS IN CUSTODY WITH ATTORNEY CRAMM/CASE CONTINUED PER RECORD MADE,DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PERSONALLY APPEAR AT NEXT COURT HEARING (JFD)(DR)
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/09/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/08/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/07/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/06/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/05/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. PRE-TRIAL MOTION on 04/02/10,09:30am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. MOTION on 03/25/10,01:00pm,Div 6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/08/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/09/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/10/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/11/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/12/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 FILE STAMP 3/4/2010, DEFENDANT'S PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS
 
NewMommy09 said:
The only thing I can come up with as far as changing jurisdictions is this:

When you kidnap someone, it's an additional charge if you carry them over state lines, correct?
So maybe if the defense can use their line about "she went willingly and wasn't kidnapped in KS" to get the jurisdiction changed, they can get any additional charge dropped for transporting her across state lines.

Not sure what good that will do when there are murder charges involved. But that's the only thing I could come up with. Also, I haven't kept up with this case very well, so my opinion is just FWIW.
Click to expand...

That's very possible, NewMommy09. I think a lot of this is just standard for a case like this, but there's got to be a reason the defense is saying that she was not kidnapped in Kansas and what you are saying, could be why the defense is using this angle.
 
Lola said:
Nothing of interest for the other two, but looks as though Hilt will go to trial

03/05/2010 FILE STAMP 3/5/2010, ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL FILED, APPOINTMENT OF NECESSARY EXPERT SERVICES
03/05/2010 COUNT 1 21-3401 PLAINTIFF APPEARS BY HOWE AND RIEBLI,DEFENDANT APPEARS IN CUSTODY WITH ATTORNEY CRAMM/CASE CONTINUED PER RECORD MADE,DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PERSONALLY APPEAR AT NEXT COURT HEARING (JFD)(DR)
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/09/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/08/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/07/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/06/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. JURY TRIAL on 04/05/10,09:00am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. PRE-TRIAL MOTION on 04/02/10,09:30am,Div 6
03/05/2010 SCHED. MOTION on 03/25/10,01:00pm,Div 6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/08/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/09/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/10/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/11/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 CANCELLED JURY TRIAL on 03/12/10,09:00am,Div6
03/05/2010 FILE STAMP 3/4/2010, DEFENDANT'S PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS
Click to expand...

Thanks, Lola!

Do you think they can actually put together the defense in this short time period? A little over 6 months from her murder to the courtroom is unusual. I still think this isn't going to go to trial, but I could be wrong.
 
I checked out Mattox and Calbeck on the JOCO website, and there has been nothing posted since mid-February on these two guys. I don't see anything that indicates that their attorneys asked for change of venue, considering Hilt's attorney is questioning the kidnapping charges, you'd think M & C's would do the same thing. There's not much of anything on their ROA's, which is odd.

I personally think that the DA has cut a deal with these two guys, and part of their plea involves testifying against Hilt, if he goes to trial. If they don't come through with what they agreed to, then I think we'll see these guys in the courtroom.

Hilt seems to be holding out for some reason. Not sure why. Maybe he thinks he'll take his chances in the courtroom.

What I don't understand is why Hilt wasn't charge with Capital Murder?
 
Wasn't there some testimony about Keighley making a remark to Mattox, he "went off" and started beating her?? Could it be that Hilt actually did not physically participate in the murder...was he driving?

Certainly does seem odd that both Mattox and Calbeck are not part of this and Hilt either thinks he can get a better deal going to trial or this is a ploy and his team will pre-emptorily accept a deal and leave Mattox and Calbeck hanging in the breeze?? I don't understand this....but Cramm played his cards extremely close to the vest during the run-up to Edwin Hall's trial, and despite the fact that you and I were pretty sure from early on that there would be no trial, it was never leaked...at least not that I recall.
 
Hilt

03/16/2010 file stamp 3/16/2010, order authorizing investigative, expert or other services
03/16/2010 file stamp 3/16/2010, order authorizing investigative, expert or other services
 
I found this article list below. I couldn't remember the details of who did what to poor Keighley.

I'll bet that the other two cut a deal to testify against Hilt because I'll bet it was the stab wounds that killed her. Twenty-nine stab wounds would probably be the cause of death. Their deal won't be made known until they either testify against Hilt in court, or Hilt agrees to a plea bargain. IMO, they are all guilty, but for whatever reason, Hilt is fighting this. Maybe he thinks he can get a better deal by going to court ... it's hard to say. I still think they are all going to accept a plea deal, but time will tell.

http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2010/01/keighley_ann_alyea_alleged_killers_will_go_to_trial.php

Fox 4 also reported that Gerald Calbeck, 18, and Joseph Mattox, 22, confessed to the killing. The hearing apparently filled in many of the blanks of what happened that night. Detectives testified that the three men beat Alyea and believed that they had killed her and put her body in the trunk. Alyea reportedly started hitting the trunk and calling for help.

After hearing the pounding, the men stopped on a gravel road and asked her if she'd tell on them. She promised not to and begged them to take her to a hospital. Detectives testified that Hilt stabbed her in the stomach with a hunting knife and Calbeck kicked her in the head. Detectives said Alyea had been stabbed a total of 29 times (at least nine to the chest) and also suffered wounds to her head and neck, according to Fox 4.

As far as the confessions, Fox 4 reports:

Mattox told police that Hilt wanted to hurt Alyea and take her car, but never mentioned murder as part of the plan. But Calbeck told investigators it was Mattox who mentioned wanting to kill Alyea and who first attacked her with a metal jack handle in the back of her car as they drove her around.

Hilt was reportedly Alyea's ex-boyfriend, and their relationship was allegedly abusive. Hilt and Alyea had each other's names tattooed on their bodies, but Alyea's father had said Hilt's name would be removed before Alyea's funeral.

Hilt, Mattox and Calbeck are charged with first-degree murder, aggravated kidnapping and aggravated robbery.
 
Lola said:
?

Certainly does seem odd that both Mattox and Calbeck are not part of this and Hilt either thinks he can get a better deal going to trial or this is a ploy and his team will pre-emptorily accept a deal and leave Mattox and Calbeck hanging in the breeze?? I don't understand this....but Cramm played his cards extremely close to the vest during the run-up to Edwin Hall's trial, and despite the fact that you and I were pretty sure from early on that there would be no trial, it was never leaked...at least not that I recall.
Click to expand...

Cramm did play things close to the vest. As far as I know, it was never mentioned in the media that Hall might be offered a plea bargain. We both figured there would be one because of the mistakes made in the DA's office. I was also told there would be a plea bargain, and that's what ended up happening. Could have just been wishful thinking on the part of the person that told me this, but it ended up happening. There was a lot of evidence against Hall that we didn't know about until Kline read the statement at the hearing. Usually you don't find out as much info as we did, but I think the Smith family wanted this to take place so there would be no doubt in any of our minds that did indeed kill their daughter.
 
HILT

03/18/2010 FILE STAMP 3/17/2010, SECOND MOTION IN LIMINE
03/18/2010 FILE STAMP 3/17/2010, MOTION TO ASSESS TIME AGAINST THE STATE FOR CALCULATION OF SPEEDY TRIAL
03/18/2010 FILE STAMP 3/17/2010, DEFENDANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Motion in Limine

....Motion in limine (Latin: "at the threshold") is a motion made before the start of a trial requesting that the judge rule that certain evidence may, or may not, be introduced to the jury in a trial. This is done in judge's chambers, or in open court, but always out of hearing of the jury. If a question is to be decided in limine, it will be for the judge to decide. Usually it is used to shield the jury from possibly inadmissible and unfairly prejudicial evidence.
 
Thanks, Lola.

I wonder if the defense is trying to keep the confessions and testimony from the other two out of Hilt's trial?

And I wonder what the deal is with the speedy trial? I still can't believe this case is going to be heard next month. That seems awfully quick to me. And I still wonder why the charges weren't upgraded to CM?
 
Sumpin's goin on, luv....that much is certain.
 
Lola said:
Sumpin's goin on, luv....that much is certain.
Click to expand...

That's for sure. It looks like the defense is pushing the state to get this to trial.

03/18/2010 FILE STAMP 3/17/2010, MOTION TO ASSESS TIME AGAINST THE STATE FOR CALCULATION OF SPEEDY TRIAL
 
luvbeaches said:
That's for sure. It looks like the defense is pushing the state to get this to trial.

03/18/2010 FILE STAMP 3/17/2010, MOTION TO ASSESS TIME AGAINST THE STATE FOR CALCULATION OF SPEEDY TRIAL
Click to expand...

Why would they be in such a rush? For that matter, why would they even want this to go to trial? Seems like a huge gamble - particularly when there have been confessions. Maybe they're attempting to push a plea bargain?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 140 more.
Total: 3,026 (members: 141, guests: 2,885)

Online statistics

Members online
141
Guests online
2,885
Total visitors
3,026
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,617
Messages
18,159,526
Members
231,787
Latest member
SapphireGem
Back
Top