GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 Aug 2014 - Enrique Arochi kidnapping trial #6

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Plano Star Courier ‏@planonewspaper 50s50 seconds ago
Jury back in the room. As Rusch tells them they are done, several nod their heads in apparent relief. #arochitrial

Natalie Solis ‏@Fox4Natalie 43s43 seconds ago McKinney, TX
Judge tells jury they are now free to talk about the trial @FOX4 #ArochiTrial

Valerie Wigglesworth ‏@vlwigg 17s17 seconds ago
Judge says he appreciates jurors' willingness to serve and their time and effort on this case #arochitrial
 
I don't know how this fell of my radar as I'm local as could be, but so so glad to see justice moving in the right direction. I had my doubts about the case being successful, so glad to have been proved wrong. Now, hopefully when he is in prison he will spill his secrets to someone.
 
Valerie Wigglesworth ‏@vlwigg 1m1 minute ago
"You guys are excused with my thanks," Rusch says. Jury out. #arochitrial

Valerie Wigglesworth ‏@vlwigg 38s38 seconds ago
Judge says Friday's hearing will start at 8:45 a.m. Court is recessed until then. #arochitrial
 
Arochi waives jury sentencing, will let judge decide punishment in Christina Morris aggravated kidnapping
Valerie Wigglesworth

The man convicted in the aggravated kidnapping of Christina Morris is waiving the jury for punishment and will let the judge decide his sentence.

[...]

District Judge Mark Rusch explained that waiving jury punishment takes the option of probation off the table. Arochi will be going to prison.

"I'll do what I think is appropriate," Rusch told Arochi in explaining his rights.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crim...ment-inchristina-morris-aggravated-kidnapping
 
jnblsm said:
But the jury hasn't heard all the sexually deviant elements and the judge has, right?
I think Roush is very fair though.
Click to expand...

I do agree that Rusch is fair-minded, and while I suspect he's not as likely to issue a sentence at the extreme end of the scale (although, he could), I expect him to render a verdict that has justice for CM in it.

The jury would have heard the SA testimony, and all the rest.
 
SteveS said:
I do agree that Rusch is fair-minded, and while I suspect he's not as likely to issue a sentence at the extreme end of the scale (although, he could), I expect him to render a verdict that has justice for CM in it.

The jury would have heard the SA testimony, and all the rest.
Click to expand...

I don't get why the state won't be able to still present evidence to the judge before he sentences him...?
 
RosemountGAL said:
I don't get why the state won't be able to still present evidence to the judge before he sentences him...?
Click to expand...

I believe the judge is already aware of most of (or all) the evidence that wasn't allowed at the trial... jmo
 
Why would he make the choice to waive the jury for punishment? Does he think he has a better chance with the Judge? In Canada, the Judge always decides the punishment or sentence.

What type of sentence do you all think he will get now that the Judge is the one deciding? I am not even sure what to guess. 40 years?
 
bradfordsleuth said:
Why would he make the choice to waive the jury for punishment? Does he think he has a better chance with the Judge? In Canada, the Judge always decides the punishment or sentence.

What type of sentence do you all think he will get now that the Judge is the one deciding? I am not even sure what to guess. 40 years?
Click to expand...

Maybe he didn't want his dirty laundry aired in front of the jury... it probably would have been a guaranteed 99 years. He's rolling the dice letting the judge decide his fate.. still might get at least 50.. jmo
 
zippixx said:
Maybe he didn't want his dirty laundry aired in front of the jury... it probably would have been a guaranteed 99 years. He's rolling the dice letting the judge decide his fate.. still might get at least 50.. jmo
Click to expand...

Yes, he has to presume that with the jury convicting him, they didn't believe any of his stories and did kidnap her, as well as killed her since she has not been seen since (and refuses to admit it or divulge her location). It could also be presumed that the jury may think AK was chosen over a murder charge (because of no body) and this is the only chance to hand him his punishment for killing her so would be more likely to sentence him closer to the max.

I have no reason to hope it but I do anyways - that a quiet deal was struck that if her remains are found before Friday there wouldn't be any other charges/trial and he might earn a slightly reduced sentence from the judge. Hope does live in the heart.
 
Just playing "what if" games over the latest turn in the road....

If you want to consider a "conspiracy theory" angle, then maybe the defense asked the judge for an extra day or two "time out" to hammer out a plea deal and provide a location that can be verified

- and maybe EA really wants to get murder off the table and be done with this, and have a plea deal with some certainty for him

- and maybe the judge said "I'm not going to ask the jury to wait around while you figure out if you have a deal or not and work on the details"

- and maybe the defense then decided to waive the jury and let the judge decide, in which case (with no jury to be inconvenienced) the judge wouldn't object to a delay of a few days

- and maybe now they have bought some time, will get to a negotiated deal based on a proffer of facts to be provided, and it will be contingent on the disclosure and finding of CM and a confession.

Who knows?
 
SteveS said:
Just playing "what if" games over the latest turn in the road....

If you want to consider a "conspiracy theory" angle, then maybe the defense asked the judge for an extra day or two "time out" to hammer out a plea deal and provide a location that can be verified

- and maybe EA really wants to get murder off the table and be done with this, and have a plea deal with some certainty for him

- and maybe the judge said "I'm not going to ask the jury to wait around while you figure out if you have a deal or not and work on the details"

- and maybe the defense then decided to waive the jury and let the judge decide, in which case (with no jury to be inconvenienced) the judge wouldn't object to a delay of a few days

- and maybe now they have bought some time, will get to a negotiated deal based on a proffer of facts to be provided, and it will be contingent on the disclosure and finding of CM and a confession.

Who knows?
Click to expand...

It's truly what I'm hoping for, Steve.
 
I took a Profile of the Offender Psychology course a few semesters ago, which mainly focused on deviant/criminal behavior, but did cover some elements of the CJ system. It was a really interesting class and it changed my perspective on bench (judge) v. jury trials. There are exceptions, but juries tend to be much tougher on criminal offenders during conviction and sentencing than judges are, statistically speaking.
Because judges are moved by the law rather than emotional appeals, it takes more to compel them to convict when compared to jurors.
By the same token, it requires more than smoke and mirrors being offered up by the defense to create reasonable doubt for judges, when facts and evidence align with the state's theory.

I've thought of that class throughout this case. I believe the verdict would have been the same had EA opted for a bench trial. IMO, his attorneys saw it too, which is why they opted for a jury trial. They could damn near bank on a guilty verdict in a bench trial. The state's evidence was too great and EA did too much damage to his defense in the early days. The defense had a greater shot at being an exception to the statistic than they did with sticking to the traditionally safer option. They suffered no incremental damage or loss if their "Hail Mary" failed. IMO, it was a reasonably good risk assessment and strategy. As is letting the judge issue the sentence.

Now, I have thoroughly exhausted my legal "knowledge" with this post lol.
 
SteveS said:
Just playing "what if" games over the latest turn in the road....

If you want to consider a "conspiracy theory" angle, then maybe the defense asked the judge for an extra day or two "time out" to hammer out a plea deal and provide a location that can be verified

- and maybe EA really wants to get murder off the table and be done with this, and have a plea deal with some certainty for him

- and maybe the judge said "I'm not going to ask the jury to wait around while you figure out if you have a deal or not and work on the details"

- and maybe the defense then decided to waive the jury and let the judge decide, in which case (with no jury to be inconvenienced) the judge wouldn't object to a delay of a few days

- and maybe now they have bought some time, will get to a negotiated deal based on a proffer of facts to be provided, and it will be contingent on the disclosure and finding of CM and a confession.

Who knows?
Click to expand...

That would be fantastic. I don't know how these things play out but if you're speculating on it, then I trust it's a possibility. I have faith (or I just hope) EA's attorneys have seen the writing on the wall in regards to the risk of future charges and DP eligibility with the same level of clarity as you have had, and are advising him, behind the scenes, accordingly. I'm going to be cautiously optimistic and keep my fingers crossed on this one.
 
One more twist in this case! ( :thinking: olive jar)

JMHO I think it was his best choice to have the Judge decide. Some of the evidence and testimony the Jury would hear would be about a case (s) that he is charged with and and not found guilty of yet and could very well hinder those cases too (not sure if he has been to court on the stolen phone or what end results was on that). On the other case he is to go to trial on in December, all the testimony would be tweeted out and then after the Jury was done could speak to the media. Any potential jury for the December case that hadn't heard or read (or formed an opinion) about would be hard to find. The media and social media has been saturated for last 3 weeks, for the trial. Now the events this week and after the sentencing. Then between Friday and December up til jury selected will be more coverage and all the details will be avail to research online if they missed any. Ability to research whatever will be presented in the December case too.

Which is another reason, jmho that the Judge doing the sentencing is better. I would hope the jury would not listen, read, research, talk about and or whatever about the case. But they have been out of court since what? Last Wednesday? As bad as I want to believe they each and everyone of them did as ordered, it is human nature and I just don't believe it happened. Also they have had the same amount of time to think about the case and form other opinions. The Judge already knows the case from the get go. From reading an article iirc DietDrPepper posted, a local attorney said that due to the 17 hour delib that the jury tend to give a long sentence. 40 years was the average iirc. The case is going to be appealed, and EA knows he is going to prison, so this is smartest route jmho.

I am not sure how much and what the Judge will hear in the rest of the case. But I am also reminded by reading the statute that (d) is still in play. Also makes me think about the State and Def attorneys going to other rooms to talk yesterday morning. The State calling the Family up my have only been letting them know that the Judge was at Dr and so forth. One could only hope it was for some other reason. Possible another twist will come about and today being Tuesday, gives until then to investigate (it that option is being thought about). Also gives the Judge time to get well. *all witnesses are still under order not to speak until released by court to media or anyone else. Jury is free to now. JMHO.

Who knows what Friday will bring except that EA is going to be sentenced to prison. And that Ea will file an Appeal. That pretty much a given with a guilty verdict. JMHO
 
SteveS said:
Just playing "what if" games over the latest turn in the road....

If you want to consider a "conspiracy theory" angle, then maybe the defense asked the judge for an extra day or two "time out" to hammer out a plea deal and provide a location that can be verified

- and maybe EA really wants to get murder off the table and be done with this, and have a plea deal with some certainty for him

- and maybe the judge said "I'm not going to ask the jury to wait around while you figure out if you have a deal or not and work on the details"

- and maybe the defense then decided to waive the jury and let the judge decide, in which case (with no jury to be inconvenienced) the judge wouldn't object to a delay of a few days

- and maybe now they have bought some time, will get to a negotiated deal based on a proffer of facts to be provided, and it will be contingent on the disclosure and finding of CM and a confession.

Who knows?
Click to expand...

One can only hope !! I pray this is the case !
 
[video=twitter;780802894723362816]https://twitter.com/AliceBarrNBC5/status/780802894723362816[/video]
 
Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 2h2 hours ago
.@xxxx 1/2 Judge Rusch explained that under the law, probation is not an option in aggravated kidnapping conviction. #arochitrial

Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 2h2 hours ago
.@xxxxx 2/2 Agg kidnapping is a 3G offense. Probation not allowed under the law. Explainer here: http://tinyurl.com/hu2cccm #arochitrial

“3G OFFENSES” IN TEXAS

3G offenses are a special category of felony offenses, listed in Texas Code of Criminal Procedure in Article 42.12 Section 3g, that are considered to be the most serious or violent and to which additional sentencing consequences apply.

Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 42.12 Section 3g lists the following offenses:

Murder
Capital murder
Indecency with a child
Aggravated kidnapping
Aggravated sexual assault
Aggravated robbery
Drug cases where a child is used in the commission of the offense, or the offense took place within 1,000 feet of a school or on a school bus.
Sexual assault
Injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual, if the offense is punishable as a felony of the first degree
Sexual performance by a child
Criminal solicitation cases that are punishable as a felony of the first degree
Compelling prostitution
Trafficking of persons
Burglary

PROBATION ELIGIBILITY IS LIMITED FOR 3G OFFENSES
The Code of Criminal Procedure lists a number of crimes where a judge cannot give probation. A person who is charged with a 3G offense generally cannot receive probation from a judge, with the exception of some cases where a jury may recommend probation. Deferred adjudication, however, may be given by a judge if the court finds it is warranted under the circumstances. A defendant may also receive probation from a jury after a guilty verdict in a jury trial.

PAROLE ELIGIBILITY IS DELAYED FOR 3G OFFENSES
If a person is convicted of a non-3G offense, they are eligible to be considered for release on parole when their actual time served plus good conduct equals one-fourth (¼) of the sentence imposed or 15 years, whichever is less.

By contrast, a person who is convicted of a 3G offense and sent to prison must serve at least half (½) of their sentence or 30 years, whichever is less. If the convicted person receives a sentence of less than 4 years, they must still serve a minimum of two years before they are eligible for release on parole. https://www.versustexas.com/3g/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 172 more.
Total: 1,980 (members: 173, guests: 1,807)

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
1,807
Total visitors
1,980
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,075
Messages
18,197,929
Members
233,727
Latest member
lillianlily
Back
Top