Found Deceased KY - Savannah Spurlock, 22, left 'The Other Bar' with 2 men, Richmond, 4 Jan 2019 #6 *Arrest*

[Seattle1]

The only issue I have with sites like that listing it as a misdemeanor, is that if you do a quick cursory search, there are still a lot of sites that haven’t updated it to a class d felony since it’s such a recent upgrade. Some of the state databases haven’t upgraded it in their systems yet either.

I'm familiar with Kristen Edward's case, and hence "Kristen's Law" effective July 1, 2019.

I believe the concept being discussed is defined as "Ex post facto law" which is defined as:

a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law.

In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed.

My understanding had always been that ex post facto laws were expressly forbidden in the United States Constitution -- at both the federal and state level, and also applicable to both criminal and civil cases.

More recently, some courts have decided that the law only applies in criminal cases.

As for DS case -- I believe he will be charged with murder so it's probably a moot point whether or not the abuse of corpse charge will remain a misdemeanor, or upgraded to felony.

MOO

Ex post facto law - Wikipedia

 

[jULIA_bEE]

I'm familiar with Kristen Edward's case, and hence "Kristen's Law" effective July 1, 2019.

I believe the concept being discussed is defined as "Ex post facto law" which is defined as:

a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law.

In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed.

My understanding had always been that ex post facto laws were expressly forbidden in the United States Constitution -- at both the federal and state level, and also applicable to both criminal and civil cases.

More recently, some courts have decided that the law only applies in criminal cases.

As for DS case -- I believe he will be charged with murder so it's probably a moot point whether or not the abuse of corpse charge will remain a misdemeanor, or upgraded to felony.

MOO

Ex post facto law - Wikipedia

I agree. Once lab results start coming back, I think there’s a good chance they’ll end up upgrading his charges. Someone asked how he could be held with no bond when he was being charged with misdemeanors. Even if the abuse of a corpse stays a misdemeanor, tampering with physical evidence is a class d felony so he’s still sitting with at least one felony charge currently.

 

[bwt42]

I agree. Once lab results start coming back, I think there’s a good chance they’ll end up upgrading his charges. Someone asked how he could be held with no bond when he was being charged with misdemeanors. Even if the abuse of a corpse stays a misdemeanor, tampering with physical evidence is a class d felony so he’s still sitting with at least one felony charge currently.

I brought up the misdemeanor charge to question why he wasn't given a bail hearing. Whether the charges are misdemeanors or felonies I believe a judge should make a bail decision within a reasonable amount of time. jmo

 

[bwt42]

I think his defense strategy will be dependent upon what happened in the couple of hours the two other men were there.

 

[rsd1200]

Cant believe that's even allowed.

The judge who saw him that day, I don't believe, is the judge who will be presiding over the case. He made what he thought was the best decisions at the time, until the case goes before the grand jury, on August 14. DS has been questioned, and has lied repeatedly. They found her blood in his home, yet, he never mentioned that she was injured, before she woke him to ask a question before leaving that morning... only to be later found buried at his parents home. Good call, by judge, imo.

 

[rsd1200]

For what it's worth, she was identified by her tattoos and fingerprints, so decomposition was not in final stages.

She was well wrapped and buried in the winter. It was during this heat wave in the past couple weeks that decomp began, and the odor started to become present.

 

[Ree89]

The judge who saw him that day, I don't believe, is the judge who will be presiding over the case. He made what he thought was the best decisions at the time, until the case goes before the grand jury, on August 14. DS has been questioned, and has lied repeatedly. They found her blood in his home, yet, he never mentioned that she was injured, before she woke him to ask a question before leaving that morning... only to be later found buried at his parents home. Good call, by judge, imo.

This though! Regardless, if she was or was not murdered her nude body was found taped up in garbage bags and buried on his familys property with a rug from his property! Is it normal to let people out when that's the finding, just because that's the only charges they could file at that time? I would say no, jmo of course. Correct me if I'm wrong. If she had been clothed and not in an 'unnatural position', then OK, maybe he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Of course all imo.

 

[rsd1200]

This though! Regardless, if she was or was not murdered her nude body was found taped up in garbage bags and buried on his familys property with a rug from his property! Is it normal to let people out when that's the finding, just because that's the only charges they could file at that time? I would say no, jmo of course. Correct me if I'm wrong. If she had been clothed and not in a`unnatural position', then OK, maybe he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Of course all imo.

Yes. If she'd been found, clothed, deceased, along either the roadway to Richmond (52), or Lexington Rd (27), say, for example, and he was the last to see her alive, with blood in his home, then there would still be more of a benefit of the doubt. Finding blood in HIS rental home, and the body shows up buried, on HIS parents' property, in what I would call a very unusual place, and position, with taped ankles/feet, well that sorta changes up the ballgame.

 

[mtnlites]

She was in a closed coffin and buried on Wednesday.

I just wanted to tell you that I thought the memorial service was very nice and thoughtful. My husband was one of her former teachers and though he works in SAR here for the state, he took her disappearance (and death) very hard. He asked that we schedule our trip out of town around the service because he truly wanted to be there. He thought a lot of Savannah. I spent a lot of time on this board in the early days, but I had to take a break because it was just hitting too close to home. The forum is a much different place when you're reading about your home area and people you're connected to (even in a vague sort of way). I'm very sorry for your loss. We've been in a similar boat where we had to bury a loved one, a child, too soon and I know that while you never really "move on" or find true closure, I do hope that justice will prevail so that your family is able to grieve her loss and celebrate her life.

 

[bwt42]

This though! Regardless, if she was or was not murdered her nude body was found taped up in garbage bags and buried on his familys property with a rug from his property! Is it normal to let people out when that's the finding, just because that's the only charges they could file at that time? I would say no, jmo of course. Correct me if I'm wrong. If she had been clothed and not in an 'unnatural position', then OK, maybe he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Of course all imo.

Yes. A judge is to only consider the charges in front of him. He has not been charged with murder. The felony charge against him is relatively minor. I would think almost anyone charged with a crime has tampered with evidence. A judge is to consider the serious of the crime & the likelihood the defendant will show up for trial. DS has ties to the community & did not flee after the alleged crime. Our system of justice does not allow keeping someone in jail just because we don't like them, jmo

 

[Ree89]

Yes. A judge is to only consider the charges in front of him. He has not been charged with murder. The felony charge against him is relatively minor. I would think almost anyone charged with a crime has tampered with evidence. A judge is to consider the serious of the crime & the likelihood the defendant will show up for trial. DS has ties to the community & did not flee after the alleged crime. Our system of justice does not allow keeping someone in jail just because we don't like them, jmo

Thanks for your input, I am not from the us, but the UK so our system is different. As you said his charges are minor, although i fail to see how abuse of a corpse is minor, but as I said I'm from the UK so everything is different here, I would still see abuse of a corpse as a big thing..in fact disgusting. I'm still learning here, about felony, misdemeanors etc. But as you said, I would think the judge would not just read the crimes, and would in fact consider everything that led up to the charges ie..there was a woman missing for 6 months, who turned up on his family's property in a disrespectful state..... While HE knew where she was all along. I do believe that would come in to play. And I don't think the judge's wouldn't consider that at all, in fact I think that's the first thing they consider when deciding bail, would be all the details, and not just the charges.

 

[rsd1200]

Yes. A judge is to only consider the charges in front of him. He has not been charged with murder. The felony charge against him is relatively minor. I would think almost anyone charged with a crime has tampered with evidence. A judge is to consider the serious of the crime & the likelihood the defendant will show up for trial. DS has ties to the community & did not flee after the alleged crime. Our system of justice does not allow keeping someone in jail just because we don't like them, jmo

BBM
I truly doubt this is the case.

 

[rsd1200]

Thanks for your input, I am not from the us, but the UK so our system is different. As you said his charges are minor, although i fail to see how abuse of a corpse is minor, but as I said I'm from the UK so everything is different here, I would still see abuse of a corpse as a big thing..in fact disgusting. I'm still learning here, about felony, misdemeanors etc. But as you said, I would think the judge would not just read the crimes, and would in fact consider everything that led up to the charges ie..there was a woman missing for 6 months, who turned up on his family's property in a disrespectful state..... While HE knew where she was all along. I do believe that would come in to play. And I don't think the judge's wouldn't consider that at all, in fact I think that's the first thing they consider when deciding bail, would be all the details, and not just the charges.

The manner in which they found her, and where they found her, are disturbing, to say the VERY least. Until the grand jury can be convened, and the judge who will be handling the case takes over, I personally feel he made the appropriate decision. It's going to be less than a month for the aforementioned to happen. They've waited over seven months, to find her, and bring her home to her family. He'll be fine.

 

[Seattle1]

RICHMOND, Ky. (WKYT) - Hundreds consisting of family, friends and community members arrived at the Oldham, Roberts & Powell Funeral Home to say goodbye to Savannah Spurlock.

Friends say walking into the funeral home is surreal but say they will never forget their friend who was known as the life of the party.

"She was always smiling, always cheerful and always happy," said J S. "I pray for her babies most of all that they grow up to have a good life and everybody remembers her family and they teach her babies how she was."

In the midst of the hundreds of people, several members of law enforcement arrived for closure to an investigation they have been following for months.

"i think it's closure for a lot of people just not the family but for all the officers that were involved or anybody that had anything to do with this case," said Richmond Assistant Police Chief Rodney Richardson.

Hundreds pay respects at Savannah Spurlock visitation

ETA: name edited bm for privacy

 

[bwt42]

I'm not advocating for bail. There should be a bail hearing scheduled where the judge either denies bail or sets bail. I'm surprised nothing has happened.

 

[Seattle1]

Sparks will remain in jail without bond until a judge reviews his bond. The case was waived to a grand jury. The jurors will hear the case on Aug. 14. An indictment will be returned on Aug. 16.
Court testimony reveals new details of Savannah Spurlock's death

After hearing testimony at DS preliminary hearing, Judge found probable cause to send the case before grand jury where DS will likely be indicted for murder of SS.

Again -- be reminded the State of KY prohibited commercial bail bondsman decades ago. Requires the "pretrial services programs officer" to make recommendation to the court at the arraignment or preliminary hearing, and bond will be set.

MOO

ETA: Others citing that prosecutor argued against bond for DS, and court decided to defer to new judge appointed after grand jury to decide bail.

 

[bwt42]

The manner in which they found her, and where they found her, are disturbing, to say the VERY least. Until the grand jury can be convened, and the judge who will be handling the case takes over, I personally feel he made the appropriate decision. It's going to be less than a month for the aforementioned to happen. They've waited over seven months, to find her, and bring her home to her family. He'll be fine.

To my understanding the judge has made no decision. That's the problem.

 

[bwt42]

Sparks will remain in jail without bond until a judge reviews his bond. The case was waived to a grand jury. The jurors will hear the case on Aug. 14. An indictment will be returned on Aug. 16.
Court testimony reveals new details of Savannah Spurlock's death

Correct. Judge must make a decision on bond.

 

[rsd1200]

I'm not advocating for bail. There should be a bail hearing scheduled where the judge either denies bail or sets bail. I'm surprised nothing has happened.

Iirc, they asked for bond, at the hearing in front of Judge Oliver, and the County Atty., Mr. Metcalf, argued against it, so Judge Oliver denied the bond, and is leaving it up to the judge who will be hearing the case, after it goes to the grand jury. The grand jury meets on August 14th. I think there's a full video of the hearing. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[Seattle1]

Iirc, they asked for bond, at the hearing in front of Judge Oliver, and the County Atty., Mr. Metcalf, argued against it, so Judge Oliver denied the bond, and is leaving it up to the judge who will be hearing the case, after it goes to the grand jury. The grand jury meets on August 14th. I think there's a full video of the hearing. I'll see if I can find it.

Thanks for this update.

I'll amend my post that "a judge" will review the bond, after grand jury concludes, (and not Judge Oliver).