Tammi Smith - the Sentencing Phase

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

ChickenPants said:
LOL....at the risk of talking to myself, I'll say it's difficult to express remorse when on the other hand you insist you are innocent. That's like saying: "I'm sorry that YOU all don't understand that I didn't do anything wrong". And then, if we all remember Tammi's insistence before, during and after the trial, that God was on her side and that she was in God's Will....you could add to the apology: "And I'm sorry you all don't understand I'm just doing what God tells me to do, so I will pray for you."

I didn't find one thing in the Arizona Penal Code that deals with God's will, so if somebody else can get around this, please let me know.
Click to expand...


Thank you for all of of the information!
LOL Love the God's will part! I do not think you will get any answers
on that one. :please:
 
Even if she ends up not being sentenced on Friday, I hope that we'll at least be able to see everything that's been going on - not reading one line notes on the case that leave a lot to the imagination.
 
ChickenPants said:
In a discussion about what we think the Judge might do .... there's no way to read his mind...it would help if we had a record of his past decisions from the bench. But we have to also remember that even if he tends to be lenient, his first obligation is to adhere to the sentencing laws. He has to apply those laws and in this case, aggravators have already been proven.
IMO if he wants to be lenient, he has to consider the defendant's character and the likelihood that she will not commit this type of crime again. The only way IMO this can be proven is evidence that the defendant understands the seriousness of the convicted offenses, sincere remorse and some indication that she has already demonstrated behaviors that satisfy the court she will not continue the kinds of activities that resulted in the crime. I would think that defense would put this forward and prosecutors would argue it with their own evidence.
Click to expand...



BBM

I don't know that the judge has been particularly lenient - especially with Tammi's supporters having been up in arms about how the judge was making rulings that did NOT favor Tammi (ie the alleged "character assasination"). And the fact that after Tammi said July 13 was not good for her, the judge initially was going to postpone her sentencing until August, took one look at her, saw the smirk on her face, and moved it UP a week to July 6 IMHO shows he's not THAT lenient towards her.

And you are on the money when you say that there are NO mitigating factors (a "Christian Intent" doesn't count), but the jury already found TWO aggravating factors. And if I am interpreting the law correctly, it means she HAS to go to either jail or prison.

I'm sure if the prosecution wins their motion to overturn the 703 ruling, that Tammi will go to jail or prison for a longer period of time, but even if it's not overturned, I think probation is out of the question because of the aggravators.

And whether or not Tammi knows what happened to Gabriel after Elizabeth ran to SA is not even an issue in Tammi's case. She was judged on HER actions - not Elizabeth's. And like you said in another post - if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Tammi insists that she had an attorney telling her what to do every step of the way, yet if my memory serves me correctly, her attorney testified that as soon as he learned Logan was fighting for custody, he told Tammi to BUTT OUT - just like the CPS worker did. The fact that Tammi continued her actions even after both her own attorney and the CPS worker told her to stop, shows not only her criminal intent, but also that she did NOT have an attorney telling her what to do every step of the way. In fact, Schutt even testified that he told Tammi he would NOT represent Elizabeth at her custody hearing if she came back, but Tammi turned around and told her that he would so she didn't have to hurry to get back.

Hopefully we'll get answers tomorrow to most of our burning questions. I think there will be some information that won't come out yet - possibly because of pending new charges against Tammi for other issues - but I think we will learn enough to stop some speculations.
 
I have done a lot of reading things that WS posted during the trial, which were not available to the jury or even people following along. One of these were some statements of Tammi's attorney regarding her "Christian" motive. Obviously the jury did not find that relevant.

Tammi presented her motive at trial as trying to help (1) Gabriel and/or (2) Elizabeth. But prosecutors have subsequently apparently learned that her "helpful" intentions have a longer reach and there is a secretive aspect to her activities - that these things were not known and have just been discovered would prove some things were hidden. Enough evidence to file for a Motion for Continuance. I'm guessing that the conviction, together with the new information, will put to rest the "Christian Intention" argument once and for all. IMO most Christians follow the law and are not secretive.

MOO
 
ChickenPants said:
I have done a lot of reading things that WS posted during the trial, which were not available to the jury or even people following along. One of these were some statements of Tammi's attorney regarding her "Christian" motive. Obviously the jury did not find that relevant.

Tammi presented her motive at trial as trying to help (1) Gabriel and/or (2) Elizabeth. But prosecutors have subsequently apparently learned that her "helpful" intentions have a longer reach and there is a secretive aspect to her activities - that these things were not known and have just been discovered would prove some things were hidden. Enough evidence to file for a Motion for Continuance. I'm guessing that the conviction, together with the new information, will put to rest the "Christian Intention" argument once and for all. IMO most Christians follow the law and are not secretive.

Good points!
I keep thinking how she has taken the "Christian thing"
to a whole new level by being "swarn" in as a minister!
Lawdy Be, Lawdy Be! :please:
Click to expand...
 
daisynae said:
ChickenPants said:
I have done a lot of reading things that WS posted during the trial, which were not available to the jury or even people following along. One of these were some statements of Tammi's attorney regarding her "Christian" motive. Obviously the jury did not find that relevant.

Tammi presented her motive at trial as trying to help (1) Gabriel and/or (2) Elizabeth. But prosecutors have subsequently apparently learned that her "helpful" intentions have a longer reach and there is a secretive aspect to her activities - that these things were not known and have just been discovered would prove some things were hidden. Enough evidence to file for a Motion for Continuance. I'm guessing that the conviction, together with the new information, will put to rest the "Christian Intention" argument once and for all. IMO most Christians follow the law and are not secretive.

Good points!
I keep thinking how she has taken the "Christian thing"
to a whole new level by being "swarn" in as a minister!
Lawdy Be, Lawdy Be! :please:
Click to expand...

I'm sure everyone has their own opinions on that, but I personally can't find it funny. History is full of people who thought they were "called" by God and used that for bogus purposes. Not only can people get hurt, but the ones who truly believe in these people can find their faith severely tested after learning the person was a fraud. This whole situation is really quite tragic, even for her.
Click to expand...
 
22 hours from now, we should learn a whole lot more than we know now....
 
ChickenPants said:
daisynae said:
I'm sure everyone has their own opinions on that, but I personally can't find it funny. History is full of people who thought they were "called" by God and used that for bogus purposes. Not only can people get hurt, but the ones who truly believe in these people can find their faith severely tested after learning the person was a fraud. This whole situation is really quite tragic, even for her.
Click to expand...


That is so true. It's people like her who are the reason that I have my faith, but don't trust "organized religion".
Click to expand...
 
As of now, looks like no one has filed any last minute motions....
 
ChickenPants said:
I'm sure everyone has their own opinions on that, but I personally can't find it funny. History is full of people who thought they were "called" by God and used that for bogus purposes. Not only can people get hurt, but the ones who truly believe in these people can find their faith severely tested after learning the person was a fraud. This whole situation is really quite tragic, even for her.
Click to expand...

I was writing about her saying she had been "swarn" in.
I agree it is very tragic!
 
artsy1 said:
ChickenPants said:
That is so true. It's people like her who are the reason that I have my faith, but don't trust "organized religion".
Click to expand...

Begging your pardon, lol, hers isn't "organized" and God help those who think she follows any "religion" but the Gospel of Tammi Smith. It certainly doesn't follow the Christ that I am familiar with who said: Everything that is hidden will be shouted from the rooftops" (paraphrase) and "I taught openly, I did nothing in secret..."
Click to expand...
 
artsy1 said:
As of now, looks like no one has filed any last minute motions....
Click to expand...

Seems like the defense has run out of things to submit other than throw their hands up in the air and say "we give up" (if there's a motion for that). The fact that the Motion for Continuance has not been denied is a hopeful sign. By now the judge has had plenty of time to read it and think about it.
 
ChickenPants said:
I have done a lot of reading things that WS posted during the trial, which were not available to the jury or even people following along. One of these were some statements of Tammi's attorney regarding her "Christian" motive. Obviously the jury did not find that relevant.

Tammi presented her motive at trial as trying to help (1) Gabriel and/or (2) Elizabeth. But prosecutors have subsequently apparently learned that her "helpful" intentions have a longer reach and there is a secretive aspect to her activities - that these things were not known and have just been discovered would prove some things were hidden. Enough evidence to file for a Motion for Continuance. I'm guessing that the conviction, together with the new information, will put to rest the "Christian Intention" argument once and for all. IMO most Christians follow the law and are not secretive.

............................................................................................................
Daisymae's post:
Good points!
I keep thinking how she has taken the "Christian thing"
to a whole new level by being "swarn" in as a minister!
Lawdy Be, Lawdy Be! :please:
Click to expand...

The quotes were mis-placed in this.
 
"It's in her nature to feel compelled to help, because of her religious beliefs, again, because of her family background. She feels compelled to help, particularly when she perceives a woman in trouble or child in trouble," said Smith's attorney, Anne Phillips.

According to the filing, Smith is easily manipulated in stressful situations, in part caused by a history of abuse from her father and first three husbands. Because of that history, her psychologist said she is naively and unrealistically trusting.

"Her character in general causes her to act a certain way. Not with criminal intent but more in a misguided attempt to help," said Phillips.

"What I think happened is that Tammi, a good citizen, a good Samaritan, a law-abiding person, got involved with the wrong person and it spiraled out of control," said Phillips.

(These quotes were clipped from a news article posted on the "Trial" thread). As we have seen, this was the argument used with reference to Gabriel and Elizabeth, who it was argued Tammi perceived were in trouble.

In a previous paragraph, this is said: According to a memorandum filed by her attorney, Smith's psychologist said she acts impulsively and without reflection where children are involved.

If it was the defense that Tammi had a "christian" motive and felt "compelled" to help Gabriel and Elizabeth, acting impulsively and without reflection, the jury felt otherwise. And those motives do not explain her other actions. There are thousands of ways to help women and children in already existing, legitimate organizations and many of those are within christian churches. You don't need to be a Rev. or head up your own to help people. And you sure don't need to do things in secret or try to get around the law.

It's now up to the judge to decide in which circumstances Tammi will be most likely to learn this.
 
Posting here since all are interested:

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/1ca/1cacase.htm

The prosecutors have appealed and asked for a stay. I am having trouble cutting and pasting- can anyone help? It's an active special action case-

1CA-SA 12-0143 State v Hon Kreamer/Smith
Court of Appeals Division 1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 136 more.
Total: 388 (members: 137, guests: 251)

Online statistics

Members online
137
Guests online
251
Total visitors
388
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,179
Messages
18,250,476
Members
234,552
Latest member
IXGVNZ
Back
Top