Mark Sievers Trial General Discussion Thread

[FelicityLemon]

I wasn't sure what the State meant by Direct Evidence when they were debating an acquittal today. See the definition of Direct Evidence in my quote? No, I don't think the State has to define it as such, not sure. The Judge seemed to agree they do have enough Direct Evidence. Hope this doesn't post twice again. You need to go back and edit one, but you can't delete the entire post. Oh, snipped by me to reply also.

You are not aloooone - my posts have been doubling and even tripled earlier today argh.

I know the definition of direct evidence, lol. . I guess my question is more procedural. I know they don't have to preface evidence by using that phrase, my question is more like CAN they do that in court: "Direct evidence proves (or will prove) blahblahblah" and then list what they say is the actual DE. Sorry, sometimes my brain just doesn't make it out my fingers, lol!

Example: "The State will prove the guilt of the defendant by presenting overwhelming evidence that includes a video of the defendant blowing kisses at the camera while he turns to shoot his victim. Other evidence we will present is a collection of 483 audio tapes of the defendant's diary where he plans and details every moment leading up to his shooting his victim."

Something like that - is it kosher to lay it out just that bluntly in either the Opening Statement or Closing Argument?
State says: "He's guilty because of 1,2,3,4...345"
Defense says: "He's not guilty because of a,b,c" or whatever they pull out of their...hats

I've seen many trials and actually never thought about this, so I'll go back and watch some random trials Openings and Closings.

Can each side present a comprehensive report so to speak. A PowerPoint presentation listing all bullets or facts and photos.
A report with an index, page numbers, evidence numbers, references, etc.

This girl can (and does) dream.

 

[TrueCrimeAddict55]

Lawyers discussing if TS was worth more to MS alive vs $5 million life insurance. Stay at home dad would get alimony and child support, sure, big whoop.

It's not all about the money for MS. He had his entire self/ego/hubris invested in his social standing 1) as a doctor's spouse and as a divorced philandering creep who took his children on his sexual playdates with other women... not so much social standing and respect.

As a wealthy widower with two little girls and a robust social life due to his aggressive social climbing... suddenly attractive to some types of women. Ew. As has been said: money couldn't buy him class, respect or a good character.

He thinks that all can be bought. We all know that respect and a good character are free except that you have to earn them. He is incapable of anything that might involve work. IMO ♡♡♡

 

[maslowbloom]

PLUS, Mrs. Mummert and Ms. Fitz. are staring down the jurors, as well as the witnesses on the stand, and making obvious facial expressions. Some jurors and witnesses could be intimidated and bullied by this. They should be confined to the back of the room, if they're visiting--not up front where they can influence others. And, certainly, NOT blocking the view of the family/friends who have been waiting to see Justice, for 4 and a half years--like Ms.Parker was doing. How rude and insensitive!

Their antics were extremely distracting today.

 

[FelicityLemon]

..

 

[debbiegarcia36]

I might be wrong, but I think she meant it as to why they’re STILL paying her. Yes, I could understand paying for her return flights and lodging, and some initial move in/living expenses, but after 4 years she should’ve been able to find her own source of employment.

I don't think the monthly stipend of $400 is indefinite. I believe it was until the end of the trial. I also believe it was a type of witness protection. TaySho was a main witness for the prosecution AND she lived in JRR's trailer in a town surrounded by CWW and JRR's bad news friends. I am sure she felt scared and threatened to testify against them and needed to get the heck out of Dodge. She asked for assistance to move. Happy to say that TaySho is now married.

 

[katydid23]

You are not aloooone - my posts have been doubling and even tripled earlier today argh.

I know the definition of direct evidence, lol. . I guess my question is more procedural. I know they don't have to preface evidence by using that phrase, my question is more like CAN they do that in court: "Direct evidence proves (or will prove) blahblahblah" and then list what they say is the actual DE. Sorry, sometimes my brain just doesn't make it out my fingers, lol!

Example: "The State will prove the guilt of the defendant by presenting overwhelming evidence that includes a video of the defendant blowing kisses at the camera while he turns to shoot his victim. Other evidence we will present is a collection of 483 audio tapes of the defendant's diary where he plans and details every moment leading up to his shooting his victim."

Something like that - is it kosher to lay it out just that bluntly in either the Opening Statement or Closing Argument?
State says: "He's guilty because of 1,2,3,4...345"
Defense says: "He's not guilty because of a,b,c" or whatever they pull out of their...hats

I've seen many trials and actually never thought about this, so I'll go back and watch some random trials Openings and Closings.

Can each side present a comprehensive report so to speak. A PowerPoint presentation listing all bullets or facts and photos.
A report with an index, page numbers, evidence numbers, references, etc.

This girl can (and does) dream.

Yes. They absolutely can and great attorneys do so.

If you want to see an excellent attorney at work, looks up the Patrick Frazee trial, from last month in Colorado. Dan May gave one of the best closings ever, and one of the best trial presentations.

It is on youtube and on Law and Crime.

 

[Curious Me]

… snipped...I've seen many trials and actually never thought about this, so I'll go back and watch some random trials Openings and Closings.

Can each side present a comprehensive report so to speak. A PowerPoint presentation listing all bullets or facts and photos.
A report with an index, page numbers, evidence numbers, references, etc.

This girl can (and does) dream.

Like you, I, too, have watched many trials going back into the past, and with no real formal law education to make it easier.

I find I tend to understand many things intuitively. For instance, when the Defense hints at some thing like CWW being a 5x felon, I know where he's going to go with it later. I understand the strategy, except maybe not in this trial. I'm also able to grasp things visually much more easily than with just listening and audio. So, like you say power point presentations, bullet lists, etc., would be an added bonus for me.

 

[debbiegarcia36]

I wrote my honest opinion. When I didn't know that she was being paid 20,000 for her testimony, I felt that she was more credible. It puts a different spin on her motivation. She didn't know JRR very long before all of this and she had other children who weren't his that she was caring for--so many people are struggling and I have compassion for them--there are other ways that she could have received aid that weren't connected to her being a witness in this case.

It is my understanding that TaySho was being paid a $400/mo rent subsidy until the end of trial. If the trial occurred within a year (instead of four years) her assistance would have been much less. I look at the funds she received as a small version of witness protection. If TaySho was going to be a witness at trial, she needed to find a place far away from anyone who might want to prevent her from testifying. She most likely felt scared and threatened. She therefore asked for assistance.

 

[kaen]

I think the prosecution has to get out in front of the bi-polar, 5x felon thing. MS went to CWW BECAUSE he was a felon and bi-polar, needed money (had a hot dog wedding), and loved his brother from another mother. CWW was ripe for the picking to do this deed. And, they need to get out in front of the idea that CWW is a marginal thinker when it comes to putting pieces together and that being a flaw in the plan. MS wanted a work place, burglary death. He even asked about it when she was found. MS didn't want details but kept saying what he wanted but CWW could not do that. MS knew that CWW would know that TS was worth a lot dead if it did not come back to MS.

The prosecuting team better be up doing their homework cause what they did so far is not cutting a clear path to guilty.

 

[1&2&3]

I can’t believe we have waited 4.5 years for this trial!

With all the information we knew regarding this murder and the characters involved, what in the world happened to disclosure of it in this trial?

How did we not hear about the ineffectiveness of the district attorney in presenting cases?

This case was a disgrace as presented! The jury will have to be able to put pieces together as reasonable doubt is what stands out to me. JMO.

 

[Curious Me]

^^^Good one, kaen.^^^
Yep, CWW had a hot dog wedding. No way did he do this without Mark asking and offering money. It's not all about love of bro. CWW and JJR wanted to make some money.

 

[Curious Me]

Yes. They absolutely can and great attorneys do so.

If you want to see an excellent attorney at work, looks up the Patrick Frazee trial, from last month in Colorado. Dan May gave one of the best closings ever, and one of the best trial presentations.

It is on youtube and on Law and Crime.

I looked for it, and couldn't find Dan May's Closing. Found one video of him talking about Kelsey as he was standing on a street, but no Closing found. I followed the trial via the texts only, so I'd love to see Mr. May in action.

 

[FelicityLemon]

Yes. They absolutely can and great attorneys do so.

If you want to see an excellent attorney at work, looks up the Patrick Frazee trial, from last month in Colorado. Dan May gave one of the best closings ever, and one of the best trial presentations.

It is on youtube and on Law and Crime.

Great! Thank you so much for the information and for the tip katydid23; I'll check out that trial. Man, another super creep that one. :/

 

[kaen]

^^^Good one, kaen.^^^
Yep, CWW had a hot dog wedding. No way did he do this without Mark asking and offering money. It's not all about love of bro. CWW and JJR wanted to make some money.

I agree totally. So, why don't the prosecutors have that sown up? This whole kill TS idea was like a classic mob type deal with lots of "you know what I mean" going on. This is why I can't believe that the prosecutors did not require more specificity in the confession they got from CWW. CWW had to have had a specific conversation with JRR at some point about what they were going to do but CWW never stipulated when and where that occurred. CWW and MS had enough conversation to get burner phones but CWW never says when he told MS the deal was on. The deal the state cut was supposed to be based on total truth but it seems like they were playing middle school legal team. Even I know, and I am not a lawyer, that you need details to make a case stick. The two prosecutors had their behinds handed to them when they could not get a 1st degree murder conviction so I thought they would have focused on doing more this time around. I am just disappointed that MS might not get a conviction.

 

[FelicityLemon]

Like you, I, too, have watched many trials going back into the past, and with no real formal law education to make it easier.

I find I tend to understand many things intuitively. For instance, when the Defense hints at some thing like CWW being a 5x felon, I know where he's going to go with it later. I understand the strategy, except maybe not in this trial. I'm also able to grasp things visually much more easily than with just listening and audio. So, like you say power point presentations, bullet lists, etc., would be an added bonus for me.

LOL, I'm a visual person - I need to see it or read it. I hated the verbal questions in school - give me a paper any time.

 

[Katharine]

It was obvious that she was emailing him messages/statutes from her computer to his during his motion — why is the public/gallery allowed to use phones and computers during a trial, in a court room, in this county??? That’s not allowed in Seminole County,FL at all. Bailiffs come over and make you put it away if it’s in use.

Yes, I noticed that, too. It was very obvious. I wonder if she has been doing that all along. The Frazee courtroom was the most strict I have ever seen including the private temporary entrance tent for no photos.

 

[Kakidoll]

They better present one hell of a closing... Spelled out in easy to understand, tied together in a nice bow, with all the sparkles needed. This is a Florida jury. They are fickle, self serving and materialistic. And I say this ASA Floridian in the area. It's a different mind set here. We are used to scammers and fakes and less than ethical people. We are a transient state. I truly hope some of the jurors are snow birds because they may have some northern ethics they brought work them. I know it sounds harsh but it's fact. I've been in our courthouse time and time again watching people walk for the 4th or 5th time in felones.... Over and over again. Is crazy.. I'd think I'm headed if I didn't continue to follow their records and see it going on again and again. Sad to say.. and why is leave this state if I could.

 

[Kakidoll]

Yes, I noticed that, too. It was very obvious. I wonder if she has been doing that all along. The Frazee courtroom was the most strict I have ever seen including the private temporary entrance tent for no photos.

That was ridiculous to me. Giving the criminal privacy. He didn't deserve the protection. And while tweeting worked, I would have loved to actually see the trial

 

[Curious Me]

I agree totally. So, why don't the prosecutors have that sown up? This whole kill TS idea was like a classic mob type deal with lots of "you know what I mean" going on. This is why I can't believe that the prosecutors did not require more specificity in the confession they got from CWW. CWW had to have had a specific conversation with JRR at some point about what they were going to do but CWW never stipulated when and where that occurred. CWW and MS had enough conversation to get burner phones but CWW never says when he told MS the deal was on. The deal the state cut was supposed to be based on total truth but it seems like they were playing middle school legal team. Even I know, and I am not a lawyer, that you need details to make a case stick. The two prosecutors had their behinds handed to them when they could not get a 1st degree murder conviction so I thought they would have focused on doing more this time around. I am just disappointed that MS might not get a conviction.

I agree with you. I noticed in the beginning of this trial that CWW was giving too vague of answers. Mark said TS was going to leave and the kids would be in danger...WHY?...only option is TS had to die...WHY? What kind of conversation is that to then go out and kill someone? Prosecution should have pressed for more details and full answers. Then the vague answers on how they planned to do it with CWW and JRR not even talking about it on their trip...maybe chokehold, maybe pool, oh hammers. CWW spends more time on dog bowl stories than giving real truthful answers. Oh, and the vague payment promises. CWW got a sweet deal to give these vague answers, the Jury may not be able to believe enough to pin it to Mark. Defense has a more open field with the vague answers CWW gave. I don't think CWW has fulfilled the plea deal. I hope the State can get any conviction.

Well, Good Night.

 

[ScotAng]

Yes. They absolutely can and great attorneys do so.

If you want to see an excellent attorney at work, looks up the Patrick Frazee trial, from last month in Colorado. Dan May gave one of the best closings ever, and one of the best trial presentations.

It is on youtube and on Law and Crime.

<bbm>(ETA: bolding didn't work.) That's one trial I would really have loved to watch live. It bugs me that we didn't get to see Dan May and team at work, but the summations at the end of the trial day were excellent, from reporters and members of groups who attended. I hope we get to read the transcripts one day soon.