NH NH - Elizabeth Marriott, 19, Durham, 9 Oct 2012 - # 9 *S. Mazzaglia guilty*

[zoey]

CC ‏@courtchatter · 1m
#SethMazzaglia defense moving for mistrial due to prosecutorial misconduct. http://courtchatter.tv/mazzaglia.htm

 

[geevee]

I missed the very beginning, what's Barth doing?

 

[Softail]

Prosecutorial misconduct. :waitasec:
Oh brother.

 

[turaj]

i think he is talking about that well dressed investigator from yesterday and she agreed that she interviewed with a specific result in mind and in favor of the defendent. The prosecutor hit that repeatly and sort of implied any search for truth was out the window for her and frankly she more or less agreed. I was surprised at the line of questioning.

 

[Xara]

Moving for a mistrial...... Again.

 

[Softail]

I missed the very beginning, what's Barth doing?

Motion for mistrial.

 

[turaj]

Barth won't get a mistrial on this but I sort of agree with him on this one but it is probably legal and just good cross.

 

[04009margaret]

Sit own Barth & stop spitting the dummy

 

[Chelly]

motion for mistrial.

sop....

 

[zoey]

The jurors have not entered yet... Atty Barth is asking for a mistrial... one issue is based on the cross-examination of the public defender's investigator yesterday. They believe she was treated unfairly and that the state left the impression that her ethical duty to the client (Mazzaglia) transcended her duty for truth, that their ultimate duty was to the client and not to the truth. The state says this is the first they've heard this.

by Jen Crompton/WMUR 7:14 AM


Read more: http://livewire.wmur.com/Event/State_vs_Mazzaglia#ixzz35Z9rodKm


bbm

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

It's too early in the morning for Barth

 

[zoey]

He says the truth is the primary obligation is to their client. That nothing was suggested, and that he framed his questions with the fact that whatever she did WAS within the law. And Hinckley also points out that there were no objections at the time. Barth says it misrepresented the public defender's office obligation. That when there is a moment of tension between obligation to client and to law, that it defaults to client and that would be a misrepresentation.

by Jen Crompton/WMUR 7:17 AM


Read more: http://livewire.wmur.com/Event/State_vs_Mazzaglia#ixzz35ZAVIma0

 

[Schmaley]

Hey everyone!! After 9 days doing ministry service in Appalachia, I am back!!

I am going to try to catch up here. Looks like I missed a whole lot.

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

He says the truth is the primary obligation is to their client. That nothing was suggested, and that he framed his questions with the fact that whatever she did WAS within the law. And Hinckley also points out that there were no objections at the time. Barth says it misrepresented the public defender's office obligation. That when there is a moment of tension between obligation to client and to law, that it defaults to client and that would be a misrepresentation.

by Jen Crompton/WMUR 7:17 AM


Read more: http://livewire.wmur.com/Event/State_vs_Mazzaglia#ixzz35ZAVIma0

The witness did herself in IMO when she answered she would never forget her (kat's) demeanor. It came across loud and clear that the witness did not like kat one bit.

 

[Jewels53]

It's too early in the morning for Barth

Your posts make me smile!

 

[zoey]

Barth is also bringing up the State's reference in cross yesterday, to the comings and goings of the defense team to Seth Mazzaglia in jail. Implicates the basic notion of attorney-client privilege. He objects to the presentation of that information given that the inferences speculate about what they were talking about. [An odd juxtaposition... that the defense team is actually part of this trial's testimony and that the lead attorney, Joachim Barth, is talking about his own inclusion on that list and how he shouldn't have to account for what he did for a half hour on a certain day....]

by Jen Crompton/WMUR 7:20 AM


Read more: http://livewire.wmur.com/Event/State_vs_Mazzaglia#ixzz35ZBQEwvE

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

Hey everyone!! After 9 days doing ministry service in Appalachia, I am back!!

I am going to try to catch up here. Looks like I missed a whole lot.

Missing all the garbage kat spewed on everyone forEVER on the stand may not have been a bad thing Schmaley!

 

[minor4th]

Ugh. What is he going on about?

 

[zoey]

Barth says posting their comings and goings puts them in the position to testify. He says it was the day after the public defenders pig roast... at his family's farm... that the situation with Seth was fluid... that he shouldn't have to testify what they talked about ... simply to rebut their own appearances. He points out the lead counsel had not been assigned yet... so there wouldn't have been any discussion of the facts of the case, but he doesn't believe he should have to be put in the position to rebut....

by Jen Crompton/WMUR 7:23 AM


Read more: http://livewire.wmur.com/Event/State_vs_Mazzaglia#ixzz35ZC35gbL

 

[Chelly]

It's too early in the morning for Barth

Agree! I can't believe that for two days a few weeks ago, I was beginning to admire him. Whatever was I thinking?