Who is Vasco Thompson?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
According to a TH on Dr Drew, HHJP prosecuted VT during his time as a prosecutor. Looking for confirmation elsewhere...

This statement on Dr. Drew surprised me as well. I haven't been able to find any confirmation, but I've had little luck finding anything about the original kidnapping case and prosecution of Dagama (search results just get me to an overview of his probation violation appeal and tons of "Casey Anthony surprise witness" listings).

If rhornsby or AZlawyer have better/quicker ability to find out the prosecutor and assistant prosecutor in the case, much appreciated. If Belvin Perry was indeed the assistant prosecutor, it would be yet another really bizarre coincidence in the case...
 
If VT does end up on the stand would that cause a conflict for HHBP? I'm worried that could cause the mistrial that the DT has been asking for almost daily since the beginning of the trial.
 
Small world, Judge Sprinkle was the judge that granted my divorce. He's no nonsense, that's for sure.
 
Good morning everyone....new member and lost.

Can anyone tell me if there is a daily thread open for discussion during the trial

Tried hard to find one but no luck.

Thank you very much

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139975"]2011.06.17 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-One) - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

Then there will be a "Trial Thread" with a link from sidebar!

:welcome2::welcome3::Welcome1::wagon::welcome4:
 
I just saw a printed quote on screen on The Nancy Grace Entertainment Show from VT's new attorney - something about his previous public defender not being very good or something. Didn't pay close enough attention, and cannot go back on my DVR as I had changed the channel.

New attorney's name? MATT MORGAN. Any relation to John?

ETA: Just checked out the Morgan & Morgan website. Matt Morgan is definately listed. That didn't take long at all - just as many here predicted yesterday.

I hope they stick it to the defense for not doing their due diligence on the phone records, or perhaps doing so, but ignoring the info for their own purposes.

I think Matt is the son. Cuttie pie too!

Never mind just looked at site too, Matt is not the one I was thinking of.
 
Oh My....Vasco just Told It Like It Is!!! Did not have that number until Feb 09!!!
 
Vasco just spoke live. He says that phone number they are talking about "I didn't have that number until February 2009".

He actually at one point did have the number in question?
 
Just saw Vasco and he said he doesn't know why they got him involved in this mess since he didnt have that phone # till 09'.
 
Vasco T and Matt Morgan and brother in law in a presser, VT says he didn't have that phone number in question until Feb 2009. No contact with GA
MM saying the kidnapping was a brief domestic dispute with an ex girlfriend he is in good terms with to this day. He didn't have good representation (or was it no representation)
Vasco is a church going man, a great guy, has paid his debt to the society, trying to move on.
 
The color of justice in this country today - green! VT couldn't afford a decent lawyer for this 5 minute domestic dispute.

And he's married to a beautiful teacher, so he must be a great guy.

LOL!

Gotta give him credit for not playing the race card, but the money card (VT obviously didn't have any good pictures to sell to ABC)
 
This is somewhat contrary to the theory outlined in this thread. We were supposed to think that VT never really had the number that George called. That it was strictly a public record database error that caused the problem. But now it looks like that database may not have been in error after all.
 
Mr Morgan said his client is being painted as a scapegoat by JB to place reasonable doubt in this case. (!) Said the PI from the DT came to Vasco's door, tried repeatedly, and Vasco did not answer.

Young Mr Morgan also said his client is a married man, a church going man, and he wants to move on with his life.



http://www.forthepeople.com/matt_morgan.htm
 
This is somewhat contrary to the theory outlined in this thread. We were supposed to think that VT never really had the number that George called. That it was strictly a public record database error that caused the problem. But now it looks like that database may not have been in error after all.

I think it only shows that the database was confused AFTER THE POINT IN TIME the calls were actually made. Had the databases been searched July 16, 2008, the only information that would have shown up was the number associated with GA's employer. AFTER THE FACT, waaaay after 2009 when we got the information in a document dump, then the numbers showed up in the databases for BOTH VT and the employer.

I don't see that AZL's info was wrong.
 
I really feel bad for Mr. Thompson. Wasn't even his ph # until February 2009. Just another person dragged through the mud of public scrutiny caused by Casey Anthony's heinous acts and her defense teams desperate lack of ethics.
 
I wonder what the DT will do with this info. Will they allow Vasco on the stand and try to prove he had the phone # prior to Feb of 09 or ????

I would LOVE to see the SA get a copy of his contract on cross and prove the phone # was first issued to Vasco in Feb 09.

Why didn't the DT research this first? They are so full of it!

jmo
 
This is somewhat contrary to the theory outlined in this thread. We were supposed to think that VT never really had the number that George called. That it was strictly a public record database error that caused the problem. But now it looks like that database may not have been in error after all.

Maybe it was George's company's number that was incorrectly entered into a public database, which migrated to other public databases, and was a duplicate of the number eventually acquired by VT in February? Or, George's company gave up the number and VT picked up in February?

In any event, whoever on the DT was looking into it does not appear to have done any analysis of who owned the phone number when the calls were made. All this bluster about calls the day before Caylee was reported missing is based on ignorance or an attempt to make fact out of fiction.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
175
Guests online
2,516
Total visitors
2,691

Forum statistics

Threads
600,419
Messages
18,108,468
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top