2010.07.26 Grand Jury begins

[cluciano63]

I'm still up, but I can see that this case tends to have lags every ten days or so...when nothing new is happening. And then you see, as has happened today, old threads being revived, out of frustration and lack of anything new.

It's hard to believe so much time has passed with so little information. I guess LE feels pretty certain that Terri is the person they are after, since they have never asked for any info from the public that does not concern her. If that's the case and they can't prove it, this limbo could continue indefinitely.

Or everyone at MCSO could be on vacation...

 

[cypress]

Based on the questionnaires and other statements made recently, I don't believe the Grand Jury proceedings went well.

IMHO...

 

[debirlfan]

I don't know what to think... DeDe hasn't been back to testify yet, has she..??? Maybe, it is a pause..??

Well, judging from the "People" article, DS is claiming she never left the farm. Unless LE can prove otherwise (and her not responding to her cell and/or someone calling her name certainly isn't proof) then I don't know what they'd call her to testify regarding. Maybe the bat phones - but the phones don't really prove much, either.

I wonder if the speculation that DS is looking for immunity is no more than that - just speculation. Since she apparently isn't the one who was supposedly seen in the truck, I don't think they've actually got anything on her.

And I don't think the GJ has enough to arrest TH, either. In fact, it's possible the GJ has suggested to LE that they might be barking up the wrong tree.

 

[newone]

I think LE screwed up from the git go .... they were so focussed on TH they forgot to look at the bigger picture - should have used the wide angle lens and remember take off the lens cap first.

 

[DairyGirl]

I think LE screwed up from the git go .... they were so focussed on TH they forgot to look at the bigger picture - should have used the wide angle lens and remember take off the lens cap first.

I don't know if they have blinders on or not. TH didn't do herself any favors by not disclosing her complete actions on June 4th, or lying on a LDT. I suppose there is a remote possibility that she was telling the truth and is just one of those unlucky people that can pass a LDT but I'm thinking that's unlikely. I also feel that if there were any other leads to pursue such as a suspicious person at the science fair or an unfamilar car that LE would have done that. They have to clear family first and those closest to the victim and unfortunately they haven't been able to do that in this case, nor have then been able to identify a different, reasonable suspect.

 

[cluciano63]

Sometimes perps don't get noticed...that is their entire plan.

 

[SmoothOperator]

I don't know if they have blinders on or not. TH didn't do herself any favors by not disclosing her complete actions on June 4th, or lying on a LDT. I suppose there is a remote possibility that she was telling the truth and is just one of those unlucky people that can pass a LDT but I'm thinking that's unlikely. I also feel that if there were any other leads to pursue such as a suspicious person at the science fair or an unfamilar car that LE would have done that. They have to clear family first and those closest to the victim and unfortunately they haven't been able to do that in this case, nor have then been able to identify a different, reasonable suspect.

 

[BeanE]

I am here to BeanE just reading <3

I started to feel cold case....please tell me I'm wrong.

I went to bed lol.

I started to think cold case yesterday too, tfrohning. If this becomes a cold case, I will be very angry, and very sad.

 

[TxLady2]

What is the purpose of the grand jury?
The primary function of the modern grand jury is to review the evidence presented by the prosecutor and determine whether there is probable cause to return an indictment.

The original purpose of the grand jury was to act as a buffer between the king (and his prosecutors) and the citizens. Critics argue that this safeguarding role has been erased, and the grand jury simply acts as a rubber stamp for the prosecutor.

Since the role of the grand jury is only to determine probable cause, there is no need for the jury to hear all the evidence, or even conflicting evidence. It is left to the good faith of the prosecutor to present conflicting evidence.

In the federal system, the courts have ruled that the grand jury has extraordinary investigative powers that have been developed over the years since the 1950s. This wide, sweeping, almost unrestricted power is the cause of much of the criticism. The power is virtually in complete control of the prosecutor, and is pretty much left to his or her good faith.


http://www.abanet.org

 

[BeanE]

Based on the questionnaires and other statements made recently, I don't believe the Grand Jury proceedings went well.

IMHO...

I think the DA assessed the questions the jurors were asking, and decided he needed to go get more, or rule some stuff out. Hard to tell which. LE was also looking for those parents who parked in the south parking lot.

All in all, looking at the presser info, and what seems to me would be the most difficult part of the case from the prosecutor's standpoint (like I have any knowledge or experience of that! ), I think proving she took Kyron out of the building would be the hardest part. I'm thinking that's what the truck-parking-at-the-school, with which I include the south side parking lot stuff as a guess, is tied to that.

Just noodlin' really.

I think with the different lens talk at the presser, it may also be that, based on the GJ jurors' questions, they're taking a step back, reviewing, and re-assessing. That could take a while, and we might not hear anything for a while they do it.

 

[BeanE]

I think LE screwed up from the git go .... they were so focussed on TH they forgot to look at the bigger picture - should have used the wide angle lens and remember take off the lens cap first.

I don't like to say LE screwed in any case. I'm an extremely strong advocate of LE, basically because I need them. But they're human, you know? I just hope they are taking a step back, taking a breath, and reviewing the case with that new lens, whether it leads to them to someone else entirely, some additional person(s), or some new/additional information about Terri's involvement. I just want them to find out what happened to Kyron, and I do trust them to do that, even if it turns out there were some glitches. Jason Gates impresses me as one caring and dedicated guy. I'm putting blind faith in him to see to it that they find out what happened to Kyron. I don't think my faith is misplaced. He cares.

 

[BeanE]

What is the purpose of the grand jury?
The primary function of the modern grand jury is to review the evidence presented by the prosecutor and determine whether there is probable cause to return an indictment.

The original purpose of the grand jury was to act as a buffer between the king (and his prosecutors) and the citizens. Critics argue that this safeguarding role has been erased, and the grand jury simply acts as a rubber stamp for the prosecutor.

Since the role of the grand jury is only to determine probable cause, there is no need for the jury to hear all the evidence, or even conflicting evidence. It is left to the good faith of the prosecutor to present conflicting evidence.

In the federal system, the courts have ruled that the grand jury has extraordinary investigative powers that have been developed over the years since the 1950s. This wide, sweeping, almost unrestricted power is the cause of much of the criticism. The power is virtually in complete control of the prosecutor, and is pretty much left to his or her good faith.


http://www.abanet.org

Maybe the jurors let him know there was too much of that, and he and LE are out getting more solid evidence.

Go LE!!! Find Kyron!!!

 

[evelyn24]

Maybe the jurors let him know there was too much of that, and he and LE are out getting more solid evidence.

Go LE!!! Find Kyron!!!

The way they (the Grand Jurors) will let LE know there is not enough evidence is by not handing down an indictment. The jurors are not going to say, "Hey we need more information, can you find some physical evidence."
They'll review what is presented whenever it's time, and they'll either hand down an indictment or they won't. They're not in there guiding the LE/DA on how to get them to indict.

 

[evelyn24]

My theory as to why the District Attorney convened a GJ is a little different. I don’t believe that the DA thought he had sufficient evidence to get an indictment at this point. I think that the DA wanted to get "on record" the testimony of the key “witnesses” that LE has unearthed so far. Memory is a mutable thing, and there is nothing like the gravitas of testifying before a Grand Jury to “fix” a memory in mind. Witnesses that have testified before a GJ are more likely to tell precisely the same story six or twelve months hence to a trial jury, I suspect, than witnesses who have spoken with LE, but not testified before a GJ. It is not unusual in complex cases for a Grand Jury to meet sporadically over a period of time to hear evidence as it accumulates.

This is very good possibility. Convene to get people on record under oath while their memories are still fresh. The DA can have this jury convene for a couple while presenting evidence on this case.

 

[BeanE]

The way they (the Grand Jurors) will let LE know there is not enough evidence is by not handing down an indictment. The jurors are not going to say, "Hey we need more information, can you find some physical evidence."
They'll review what is presented whenever it's time, and they'll either hand down an indictment or they won't. They're not in there guiding the LE/DA on how to get them to indict.

Yes, I know the jurors don't explicity say they need more info. I had said in several previous posts that you probably didn't see, that grand jurors let astute DAs know there is not enough evidence by the questions they ask the witnesses that are testifying. Those astute DAs can then send LE out for more evidence.

But it could be these particular jurors didn't ask any questions at all. Perhaps in that case, if the DA is astute, body language told him there wasn't enough evidence. Maybe the jurors were falling asleep.

Or the jurors may well have sat stone-faced and silent, the DA may not be astute or in tune with them, and the press conference may have been held and the info requested from the public just on a whim. Who knows?

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

When we were hearing from Kaine and Desiree regularly, they continually expressed confidence in the progress of the investigation. After 11 weeks, I wonder how they feel now? Do they still believe that LE is on track and working to bring Kyron home? Another Friday has arrived, will we hear from Kyron's parents today? Where is this beautiful boy?

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I think back to an early interview when Desiree spoke of a houseboat they had rented for August and still planned on going because Kyron would be home. My heart breaks for them.

 

[loves2bmom]

I think the investigation has had a few bumps but is moving along. With the way we are used to getting news instantaneously, it feels like it's going slowly but I have faith it's moving forward. I think the GJ is taking a bit of a break.

MOO

 

[cluciano63]

I noticed in the Phuong Lee thread that LE has come out indicating that they may be looking for a stranger as far as her abductor/murderer. Initially, the fact that Phuong apparently had a relationship with a married man seemed to be the only thing LE was looking at. Sorry to be OT.

 

[GrainneDhu]

Very interesting. Thank you. This info still leaves me very surprised that a RO that would involve separating a young child from her mother would not be evaluated in another way than what you described.

Thanks for your post.

I was involved (in a very minor role) in the effort to get the laws about restraining orders changed in my state.

At the time (early 1980s) the issue of domestic violence had just started getting serious, widespread public attention. The concern was how to balance giving the victims of domestic violence as much legal protection as quickly as possible versus the rights of the accused perpetrator.

The assumption was made in writing the law that the petitioner had left their own home with nothing but what they were wearing at the time and had no access to what they had left behind. So they wouldn't have copies of medical reports, police reports, journal entries, etc, in asking for a restraining order.

The balance that was eventually decided on was to make getting a temporary restraining order as easy as possible. The petitioner didn't have to present any supporting documentation or witnesses, all they had to do was describe the reason(s) they were asking for a restraining order. This meant that getting a temporary restraining order could be done in less than an hour (depending on finding a judge).

To protect the rights of the respondent, it was decided that they needed the right to challenge the temporary restraining order and to be able to do so as quickly as possible. In my state, if the respondent challenges the temporary restraining order, there has to be a show-cause hearing within five business days (weekends and state holidays excepted).

At that show-cause hearing, the petitioner must produce documentation, witnesses and/or other evidence to support their allegations. The respondent can challenge that evidence, cross examine witnesses, etc.

Because the show-cause hearing occurs so quickly, the respondent has the option to watch the petitioner's case and then ask for an extension for more time (up to two weeks) in order to organise their own defence.

Until the show-cause hearing is decided, the temporary restraining order remains in effect.

It's not a perfect system but it was the best compromise the legislature of this state could come up with to provide victims of violence with legal protection without unduly violating the rights of the accused.

If the respondent chooses not to challenge, then a judge never really evaluates the petition beyond checking to make sure that the allegations fall within certain parameters and that the remedies being asked for also fall within the law.

If the respondent does challenge, then the judge sees the evidence, the defence and then, finally, actually makes a judgment about whether they think the allegations are legitimate or not.