Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It could be about control. We know people described her as being rigid. Being in jail is all about people taking away your choices. Refusing to come to an arraignment could be her trying to control what she can about the situation. But I agree, it's not a good look. It shows contempt for the court and for the victims' family.Highly unusual for a defendant in a capital murder case not to be present in court for their arraignment.
This could be it or perhaps she is decompensating mentally? Was her mental state mentioned at the arraignment? MOOO.It could be about control. We know people described her as being rigid. Being in jail is all about people taking away your choices. Refusing to come to an arraignment could be her trying to control what she can about the situation. But I agree, it's not a good look. It shows contempt for the court and for the victims' family.
MOO
She did appear in court last month but waived the hearing.This is upsetting. From today. WHY are these accused allowed to "sit this one out".... again and again?
"Ms. Virzi waived her preliminary hearing last month, and she was formally arraigned on the charges against her Friday. She was not in court for the arraignment. Several supporters of the Katz family were present."
![]()
DA seeks death penalty against San Diego woman accused in Shadyside newborn's death
The Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office will seek the death penalty against a California woman accused of killing her friend’s newborn...www.post-gazette.com
Also it mentions "The Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office will seek the death penalty ...."
Adam Montgomery didn't have to attend the entire trial for killing his own daughter. He was forced to attend the sentencing hearing.How can she get away with not showing up? In all seriousness. Can someone please explain? Tyia
And depending on where you are, some don't have to attend the sentencing, either. I know the British system is different, but I know there was an uproar when Letby refused to attend her first sentencing. People were petitioning parliament to try to change the law to force convicted people to attend their sentencing.Adam Montgomery didn't have to attend the entire trial for killing his own daughter. He was forced to attend the sentencing hearing.
And depending on where you are, some don't have to attend the sentencing, either. I know the British system is different, but I know there was an uproar when Letby refused to attend her first sentencing. People were petitioning parliament to try to change the law to force convicted people to attend their sentencing.
I think people get angry when they learn that no, there isn't something in the law that compels defendants to be there in person for hearings and trials and witness testimony and impact statements. In a lot of places, they can't be forced to actually be in the courtroom.
MOO
Depends on where they're coming from. They bused Letby from the prison she was housed in every day, I think. At least an hour or two there, same back. Probably shackled the whole time. Then sitting there all day listening to all the witnesses lining up to talk about all the evidence they have for what you did. For months. And you just have to sit there quietly and lump it.I'd think they'd want to just for a change of scenery and possibly better meals.
This is upsetting. From today. WHY are these accused allowed to "sit this one out".... again and again?
"Ms. Virzi waived her preliminary hearing last month, and she was formally arraigned on the charges against her Friday. She was not in court for the arraignment. Several supporters of the Katz family were present."
Also it mentions "The Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office will seek the death penalty ...."![]()
DA seeks death penalty against San Diego woman accused in Shadyside newborn's death
The Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office will seek the death penalty against a California woman accused of killing her friend’s newborn...www.post-gazette.com
You’re right. I guess I’m so used to the idea of plea deals — to save costs and to ensure some type of conviction— that I forgot that they can be withheld or denied.
See image below from articles about the effects of excessive plea bargaining in the U.S. court system:
Yes, it’s known in jurisprudence that plea deals are often a form of coercion, and circumvent due process. This case is very strange.
Thank You for posting this ^^^ in reply to my question some time ago now, @SMK777. I've read up on it some. Not sure I saw this as a DP case. There is something that bothers me about plea deals, too.. I wonder if NV will now feel backed into a corner to want to avoid a trial and take a deal if offered. All thoughts and opinions here.
Reeling from the facts that she was such a dedicated student then presto chango she's on a brief vacation, sudden bizarre crimes against babies, and now she's facing a DP trial. Wish we could hear more about the impressions people in her life had about her at school and the spin class she taught, and if she ever cared for babies before. MOO, the charges for her alleged actions are just so bizarre.
That's an interesting point but IMO I think they're using "abuse" to refer to "child (in this case, infant) assault"- be it just one instance or a pattern, it's an assault. Maybe they're using one word to keep it as vague as possible until she is arraigned.I also feel confused with this case.
With the baby who who had genital injuries, articles have said "abuse". I tend to think of abuse being something longer term/ongoing. Did NV repeatedly babysit or have access to the babies? Or was it a one time thing? If once, how would bruising have occurred so quickly?
It all seems so odd and I have to wonder what made LE feel certain that NV is the perp vs. other adults with access to the babies?
I’m confused by these things as well. I had thought she only babysat the one time, but the information is unclear.I also feel confused with this case.
With the baby who who had genital injuries, articles have said "abuse". I tend to think of abuse being something longer term/ongoing. Did NV repeatedly babysit or have access to the babies? Or was it a one time thing? If once, how would bruising have occurred so quickly?
It all seems so odd and I have to wonder what made LE feel certain that NV is the perp vs. other adults with access to the babies?
(I apologize if these items have already been addressed. I have tried to read this thread periodically but may have missed posts.)
What's the connection with babies bringing on her apparent wrath? MOO, the charges for her alleged actions are just so bizarre.
Thank You for posting this ^^^ in reply to my question some time ago now, @SMK777. I've read up on it some. Not sure I saw this as a DP case. There is something that bothers me about plea deals, too.. I wonder if NV will now feel backed into a corner to want to avoid a trial and take a deal if offered. All thoughts and opinions here.
Reeling from the facts that she was such a dedicated student then presto chango she's on a brief vacation, sudden bizarre crimes against babies, and now she's facing a DP trial. Wish we could hear more about the impressions people in her life had about her at school and the spin class she taught, and if she ever was around or babysat babies before. What's the connection with babies bringing on her apparent wrath? MOO, the charges for her alleged actions are just so bizarre.
There are many heinous cases of child abuse. If she's guilty, this is one of them. Still it's surprising they may seek the DP. IMO she will likely continue to insist she's innocent and will have a strong defense team.
But then the evidence will come out at trial. They're definitely keeping the details close to the vest for now.