MI MI - Julia Niswender, 23, EMU student, Ypsilanti, 10 Dec 2012 - #4

[georgiasblu]

On August 4, I received a text from my daughter, KT, in which she said that weeks ago, she tried to join this forum but the administrator has not authorize her. I'm not sure if that is true but it sure would be beneficial to have her join this forum. According to her text, the two lap tops that they owned are in police custody. She also stated that she never had the actual pictures in her possession but merely descriptions of the pictures as part of the discovery package for JT's lawyer. She did not say what exactly happened when LE got the first computer but she did say I didn't tell the "story" exactly how it happened. I merely posted what I was told. The next pretrial is scheduled for August 14th.

Thanks for sharing. At least you are getting some communication. Perhaps she has not completed the verification process. It can be difficult to repeat a story exactly but it seems you try to be evenhanded and fair. No wonder your Julia thought you were the best man she knew.

 

[Skigirl]

On August 4, I received a text from my daughter, KT, in which she said that weeks ago, she tried to join this forum but the administrator has not authorize her. I'm not sure if that is true but it sure would be beneficial to have her join this forum. According to her text, the two lap tops that they owned are in police custody. She also stated that she never had the actual pictures in her possession but merely descriptions of the pictures as part of the discovery package for JT's lawyer. She did not say what exactly happened when LE got the first computer but she did say I didn't tell the "story" exactly how it happened. I merely posted what I was told. The next pretrial is scheduled for August 14th.

Joining should be possible without any sort of authorization... it's the verification as an insider that could take a little while. It usually doesn't take *too* long, though, so I would encourage her to join Websleuths

(modsnip)

 

[Trojan1966]

Joining should be possible without any sort of authorization... it's the verification as an insider that could take a little while. It usually doesn't take *too* long, though, so I would encourage her to join Websleuths...

Evidently my daughter does visit this site periodically, I'm sure she will see this post. If she truly wants to join, she should follow-up on it.

 

[Spellbound]

Indeed she should, Trojan. She would be welcomed. I have never known anyone to wait weeks to be approved for membership. She does not need verification to post/read.

 

[bessie]

ADMIN NOTE:

Verified Professionals and Case Insiders

We are lucky enough to have posters from all walks of life with a broad spectrum of expertise. Some hold specialized knowledge that applies to the various circumstances of the cases we discuss, and can contribute valuable insight and information. We welcome their participation.

To ensure that anyone posting as a "professional" in a specific field truly is what/who they claim to be, WS employs a verification process.

The verification process also applies to "case insiders". Relatives, friends, and others personally acquainted with a victim or suspect; or a professional working on behalf of a victim or the family, i.e., a private investigator, can submit a request to be verified as a "case insider".

If you would like to become verified, please contact WS Administration at wsverify@gmail.com with your Websleuths name, your real name, the case, a telephone number, and the times when you can be reached.

If you are a "professional" or "case insider", but would prefer not to be verified, please understand that you will be required to follow the general rules for posting, and back up your statements with links to appropriate sources.

ETA: I have to add a correction to Skigirl's post. Alerting on a post is not the way to go. One should submit an email request to wsverify@gmail.com, and be prepared to submit a copy of a valid ID, and in the case of a "professional", credentials. Any personal information submitted is held in strict confidence by WS Adminstration.

 

[electric_rainbow]

New article on the child *advertiser censored* case:

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/08/warrant_turned_over_after_mist.html

 

[black_squirrel]

New article on the child *advertiser censored* case:

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/08/warrant_turned_over_after_mist.html

Search warrants obtained by The Ann Arbor News show the computer was searched in relation to the homicide of Niswender, who was found in Ypsilanti apartment in December 2012.

In November 2014, Ypsilanti police were granted a warrant to search Turnquist's home for a laptop that Turnquist later agreed to turn over, according to a December 2014 search warrant requesting the search of the computer.

Kimberly Turnquist, Julia Niswender's mother then rescinded that consent due to the amount of time it was taking, but the department retained the computer after presenting her with the a copy of the prepared search warrant, according to the December search warrant.

The documents requested by JT's defense have been turn over it seems, so there probably will be a trial. I am curious for the reason for the November search warrant.

 

[Spellbound]

There is sensitive information within the affidavit that could potentially compromise our homicide investigation. We were asked to make a split second decision on release of our homicide documents in open court, and felt that it would be prudent to consult with our Washtenaw County prosecutors prior to making such a determination because they would be responsible for trying our homicide investigation.

Full response at:
http://media.mlive.com/annarbornews_impact/other/Search Warrant response.pdf

 

[georgiasblu]

It looks as if going forward with the *advertiser censored* trial is still up in the air. I'm hoping for a trial to answer some questions. I want to hear what JT says on the stand.

 

[TigerBalm]

It looks as if going forward with the *advertiser censored* trial is still up in the air. I'm hoping for a trial to answer some questions. I want to hear what JT says on the stand.

I would be surprised if he ever takes the stand. Remember we are talking about the same guy, who can't even bother to give a formal statement to LE, regarding his whereabouts in the days prior to his stepdaughter's murder.

 

[georgiasblu]

I would be surprised if he ever takes the stand. Remember we are talking about the same guy, who can't even bother to give a formal statement to LE, regarding his whereabouts in the days prior to his stepdaughter's murder.

You are probably correct and it was likely the posturings of his defense attorney.

 

[DazednConfuzed09]

Is this the same search warrant Detective Coppock couldn't remember signing, let alone authoring per Judge White's statements???

"I obviously expressed my irritation at how we could not know the existence of these documents, not to point the finger at the prosecution because they weren’t in possession of it," he said. "However, I think the defense is entitled to it. Today, on the morning of trial, they received one search warrant, however, the basis for that search warrant was a 12-page search warrant that Coppock wasn’t sure she even signed. I was perplexed by her testimony, and for all of those reasons, I'm going to grant a mistrial." http://www.freep.com/story/news/2015/08/03/james-turnquist-emu/31065651/

Lt. Gress makes it clear that Detective Coppock did author the document....the same document that was denied being in existence just over a week ago while under oath! http://media.mlive.com/annarbornews_impact/other/Search Warrant response.pdf

Why not just tell the judge you would rather not turn the document over because of sensitive material contained within and risk contempt of court? Why flat out lie under oath and risk pergery?? Definitely shows lack of integrity! If you'll lie under oath, you'll lie anywhere!

 

[georgiasblu]

Is this the same search warrant Detective Coppock couldn't remember signing, let alone authoring per Judge White's statements???

"I obviously expressed my irritation at how we could not know the existence of these documents, not to point the finger at the prosecution because they weren’t in possession of it," he said. "However, I think the defense is entitled to it. Today, on the morning of trial, they received one search warrant, however, the basis for that search warrant was a 12-page search warrant that Coppock wasn’t sure she even signed. I was perplexed by her testimony, and for all of those reasons, I'm going to grant a mistrial." http://www.freep.com/story/news/2015/08/03/james-turnquist-emu/31065651/

Lt. Gress makes it clear that Detective Coppock did author the document....the same document that was denied being in existence just over a week ago while under oath! http://media.mlive.com/annarbornews_impact/other/Search Warrant response.pdf

Why not just tell the judge you would rather not turn the document over because of sensitive material contained within and risk contempt of court? Why flat out lie under oath and risk pergery?? Definitely shows lack of integrity! If you'll lie under oath, you'll lie anywhere!

Eh. Not sure that was perjury as she stated she couldn't remember, something lawyers tell you to say to avoid perjury charges. She didn't deny it and it looks like they were caught unaware regarding the division of the child *advertiser censored* charges and the active homicide investigation. At this point, I'll wait and see how this shakes out before I make decisions.

 

[DazednConfuzed09]

Eh. Not sure that was perjury as she stated she couldn't remember, something lawyers tell you to say to avoid perjury charges. She didn't deny it and it looks like they were caught unaware regarding the division of the child *advertiser censored* charges and the active homicide investigation. At this point, I'll wait and see how this shakes out before I make decisions.

Fair enough! I do question how they could be unaware of the "supposed" division when one stemmed from the other. LE involved are not newbies to the job and neither is the Prosecutor. I think they knew they were busted when the Judge was going to force the issue this Friday.

 

[Spellbound]

It appears they (Ypsilanti) wanted their legal rep's advice before turning it over .... perhaps he/she probably was not in court that trial day.

 

[Trojan1966]

I think anyone who reads the Ypsi Police release will understand what exactly happened. If JT attorney had requested the information long ago, why wasn't it ever brought up at any of the previous pretrials? I think this was just another tactic by the lawyer to try to make the police look bad. I want the truth to come out. Obviously there was *advertiser censored* on the computer, no one has said there wasn't. It will now be up to the court to decide whether or not it was child *advertiser censored* and whether or not JT is guilty. I hope JT takes the stand to testify because then the prosecutor will have a chance to ask questions too. Possibly after all this legal maneuvering by JT's lawyer, he will not put JT on the stand. As they say, time will tell....... Julia was murdered and the Ypsi PD needs everyoneto cooperate and assist in the investigation. Why not cooperate 100%? All I want is to find out the truth and nothing but the truth.

 

[black_squirrel]

Is this the same search warrant Detective Coppock couldn't remember signing, let alone authoring per Judge White's statements???

"I obviously expressed my irritation at how we could not know the existence of these documents, not to point the finger at the prosecution because they weren’t in possession of it," he said. "However, I think the defense is entitled to it. Today, on the morning of trial, they received one search warrant, however, the basis for that search warrant was a 12-page search warrant that Coppock wasn’t sure she even signed. I was perplexed by her testimony, and for all of those reasons, I'm going to grant a mistrial." http://www.freep.com/story/news/2015/08/03/james-turnquist-emu/31065651/

Lt. Gress makes it clear that Detective Coppock did author the document....the same document that was denied being in existence just over a week ago while under oath! http://media.mlive.com/annarbornews_impact/other/Search Warrant response.pdf

Why not just tell the judge you would rather not turn the document over because of sensitive material contained within and risk contempt of court? Why flat out lie under oath and risk pergery?? Definitely shows lack of integrity! If you'll lie under oath, you'll lie anywhere!

You make a good point. I think detective Coppock clearly was lying when she said that that she did not remember signing the warrant. In her short career as a detective, I doubt if she authored/signed many search warrants, it would be very likely that she would remember authoring and signing a 12 page search warrant. Besides, one one think that she would refresh her memory before going under oath in a high profile case. Because it is not possible to prove what she remembers or not, she does not really risk perjury. The question remains though why she did not give a straight answer as to whether she signed the warrant.

In their statement:
http://media.mlive.com/annarbornews_impact/other/Search Warrant response.pdf
the Ypsilanti police does not mention the request of JT lawyer for these documents months ago. In fact, they say:

Due to procedural issues relative to this specific case, and prosecution in general, no parties anticipated the requirement of search warrant documentation regarding the homicide investigation until the day of trial.

But JT's lawyer made the request months ago, so the Ypsi police and the prosecutor SHOULD have anticipated the requirement to produce these documents.

 

[georgiasblu]

It appears they (Ypsilanti) wanted their legal rep's advice before turning it over .... perhaps he/she probably was not in court that trial day.

That is how it appeared to me. Also, didn't the article state Monroe didn't ask for the initial warrant until that morning? I don't consider this all on Ypsi as defense claims. I think that was a clever attempt to taint what Ypsi has in that warrant. JMO, of course. Somehow I missed the found 300k *advertiser censored* images. Yowsers. I wonder if that was what Gma R referred to as "unhealthy" conditions.

 

[Trojan1966]

In their statement:
http://media.mlive.com/annarbornews_impact/other/Search Warrant response.pdf

But JT's lawyer made the request months ago, so the Ypsi police and the prosecutor SHOULD have anticipated the requirement to produce these documents.

If this is true and the lawyer considered this to be so important - why did he not follow-up on this before the day in court. If I needed a report from someone prior to an important meeting, I'd never wait until just before the meeting to see if it was done. JT's lawyer knew exactly what he was doing, otherwise this would have been discussed at any one of the pretrials. JMO

 

[black_squirrel]

I think anyone who reads the Ypsi Police release will understand what exactly happened. If JT attorney had requested the information long ago, why wasn't it ever brought up at any of the previous pretrials? I think this was just another tactic by the lawyer to try to make the police look bad. I want the truth to come out. Obviously there was *advertiser censored* on the computer, no one has said there wasn't. It will now be up to the court to decide whether or not it was child *advertiser censored* and whether or not JT is guilty. I hope JT takes the stand to testify because then the prosecutor will have a chance to ask questions too. Possibly after all this legal maneuvering by JT's lawyer, he will not put JT on the stand. As they say, time will tell....... Julia was murdered and the Ypsi PD needs everyoneto cooperate and assist in the investigation. Why not cooperate 100%? All I want is to find out the truth and nothing but the truth.

I THINK that the following happened. Stablein (JT's lawyer) DID request the documentation for the search warrant(s). He was not provided with that documentation. He did NOT bring it up again in pretrial, but waited until the trial itself. Although the prosecutor and/or Ypsilanti police should have anticipated it, the warrant was requested at trial and they could not provide it. This was an embarassment for the Ypsilanti police. So Stablein perhaps could have saved the Ypsilanti Police from embarassment by bringing the lack of documentation up earlier. Let me just emphasize that I am not an insider, so I am not privvy to anything that JT's lawyer or the Ypsi police did or did not do. This is all speculation.

But gee, why would he do so? The Ypsilanti police has named JT as a person of interest, a move that Stablein has described as being reckless. As far as I know, the Ypsi police has never explained why they searched the Turnquists' house. They say that they named JT a person of interest because he has not made a formal statement about his whereabouts for several days prior to Julia's death. It seems to me unusual that a person has to provide a formal alibi for several days, and Ypsilanti Police has never explained why they need such formal statement. In short, the Ypsilanti police is treating JT as a suspect, and is doing so publicly by announcing that he is a POI. Perhaps the Ypsi police has good reasons for treating JT this way (hopefully we soon find out when we get more details about the search warrant). But if not, then the public accusation by YPD that JT has more information about Julia's death seems to me far worse than the embarassment that Ypsilanti is suffering from at this moment.

I also would like to find out the truth. I think an important question is whether Ypsilanti police is on the right track if they investigate JT for the murder of Julia. I don't know, but I am at least a little bit sceptical because there seem to be a lot of accusations against JT but none of those accusations have been substantiated so far. Hopefully we find out the basis for the search warrant and we will be in a better position to judge whether the Ypsilanti police is on the right track, or whether they botched the investigation. MOO.