GUILTY AZ - Daniel Rodriguez, 29, fatally shot by Phoenix PD officer, 5 Oct 2010 #2

[aa9511]

A poster on JJ Fan Page said this re: the bike:

"I was there yesterday - The judge said two things as to why it was denied - First was the timeliness issue (Which I personally disagree with) Mr. Mehrens called this motion - trial by ambush - Juan only knew that Chrisman was saying the bike was the weapon and the reason for the shooting the day before. Also, the jury had a question about the bike. The other one was that during the earlier parts of the trial, the bike had been handled numerous times and any evidence that COULD have been there may have fallen off - MOTION DENIED -"

Another poster posted that Haag was going to testify to the lack of blood found on the bike.

This judge is dizzy. Blood doesn't just fall off. It will always be there unless you use special solvents, like bleach or some such. He is precluding evidence that will hurt Chrisman. It is NOT trial by ambush because Juan just learned of Chrisman's new version in his testimony. Just like introducing gas can evidence in JA trial is not trial by ambush nor is it untimely.

To say that Juan shouldn't let the guy testify because of the handling of the bike is ridiculous. That is just speculation on his part and if that was something that really was an issue, the defense simply could have pointed that out on cross examination and let the jury decide. That is huge, relevant evidence. The judge is not allowing Juan to present the best case he can. It's infuriating. And, I suspect that there will be more allegations of partiality to come up in the future with this judge re: this trial, especially if Chrisman is found not guilty. He never weighed the arguments of the motions. Whatever the defense brought up, the judge decided that was enough, it was all he needed and decided that anything that could hurt them should be precluded.

People may have issues with Judge Stephens, but at least she takes time to weigh all arguments equally and give a fair ruling. If she has to call recess so she can go back and do research before ruling, she does it. She is a sound judge.

I also heard the judge saying something about gunshot residue particles....he was saying that if there were any particles left on the bike from gunshot residue (called stipling, I believe), they would have fallen off by now. At least, that's what I heard in the few minutes shown on Youtube...he must have talked about the blood before then.

The bike would have gotten blood on it anyway from the spraying of blood after Daniel was shot, so I don't see how the blood would be relevant at this point.

I really don't think that the jury is missing out on anything from excluding Hagee's testimony about the bike. Sure, it could have been helpful. But I'm sure the jury can look at the pictures, and use common sense to realize that Daniel was NOT holding the bike up like Chrisman said, and it would have been difficult for Chrisman to get two clear shots in if Danny was holding the bike up in front of him.

 

[geevee]

I also heard the judge saying something about gunshot residue particles....he was saying that if there were any particles left on the bike from gunshot residue (called stipling, I believe), they would have fallen off by now. At least, that's what I heard in the few minutes shown on Youtube...he must have talked about the blood before then.

The bike would have gotten blood on it anyway from the spraying of blood after Daniel was shot, so I don't see how the blood would be relevant at this point.

I really don't think that the jury is missing out on anything from excluding Hagee's testimony about the bike. Sure, it could have been helpful. But I'm sure the jury can look at the pictures, and use common sense to realize that Daniel was NOT holding the bike up like Chrisman said, and it would have been difficult for Chrisman to get two clear shots in if Danny was holding the bike up in front of him.

Seems to me if he had the bike held up as high as RC shows, the pedals/chain assembly would be blocking his chest from the bullets. Probably what JM really wanted to demonstrate, too bad he couldn't.

 

[aa9511]

Seems to me if he had the bike held up as high as RC shows, the pedals/chain assembly would be blocking his chest from the bullets. Probably what JM really wanted to demonstrate, too bad he couldn't.

bbm

good point. Since the bike's already been "manhandled," hopefully the jury will request to see it and manhandle it some more. Let's hope. That way they can inspect it in person, hold it up, etc..

 

[Jewels53]

Well it doesn't sound like I really missed any testimony from yesterday. I see or hear you got a live stream for basically nothing.

Geevee you and I have survived this trial pretty much by tweets it has been a long road. I think I will spend sometime this weekend reviewing what video we do have.

I sure hope we do get a live stream for Monday. As far as bugging Media about that I will stay out of it. I think it is between the court and media if we get a stream. jmo

I am sure Juan is aware of Judge Granville's history and so is the District Attorney's Office.

 

[aa9511]

Well it doesn't sound like I really missed any testimony from yesterday. I see or hear you got a live stream for basically nothing.

Geevee you and I have survived this trial pretty much by tweets it has been a long road. I think I will spend sometime this weekend reviewing what video we do have.

I sure hope we do get a live stream for Monday. As far as bugging Media about that I will stay out of it. I think it is between the court and media if we get a stream. jmo I am sure Juan is aware of Judge Granville's history and so is the District Attorney's Office.

bbm

yes, jewels, exactly, so if the media gets a lot of requests from the public, they are more likely to ask the court for the stream, I think. hopefully. Like they knew everyone wanted to see Chrisman testify, so they got the stream for that.

 

[geevee]

Well it doesn't sound like I really missed any testimony from yesterday. I see or hear you got a live stream for basically nothing.

Geevee you and I have survived this trial pretty much by tweets it has been a long road. I think I will spend sometime this weekend reviewing what video we do have.

I sure hope we do get a live stream for Monday. As far as bugging Media about that I will stay out of it. I think it is between the court and media if we get a stream. jmo

I am sure Juan is aware of Judge Granville's history and so is the District Attorney's Office.

It has been a trip, huh Jewels? I need to go over Officer V's testimony this weekend myself.

I don't see anything suspicious about Granville having the case, it was listed under the Master Calendar so any judge who had room on his schedule would get it for trial, just because JSS had it initially never meant she'd try it, her arms are still full with JA.

I'm not giving the ex-cop son too much consideration either, there could be bias either way (the son was booted for what happened and hard feelings could be present on his and his Dad's part towards the booters). I'll just stick with the evidence in the case and trust that the judge and jury will as well.

I found 2 Minute Entries for RC's trial (.pdf):

7/31/13:

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/082013/m5884060.pdf

8/01/13:

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/082013/m5892140.pdf

 

[Jewels53]

It has been a trip, huh Jewels? I need to go over Officer V's testimony this weekend myself.

I don't see anything suspicious about Granville having the case, it was listed under the Master Calendar so any judge who had room on his schedule would get it for trial, just because JSS had it initially never meant she'd try it, her arms are still full with JA.

I'm not giving the ex-cop son too much consideration either, there could be bias either way (the son was booted for what happened and hard feelings could be present on his and his Dad's part towards the booters). I'll just stick with the evidence in the case and trust that the judge and jury will as well.

I found 2 Minute Entries for RC's trial (.pdf):

7/31/13:

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/082013/m5884060.pdf

8/01/13:

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/082013/m5892140.pdf

Thanks Geevee, I thought you might agree.

I think if Juan felt he was justified about the bike and Hagg he would have fought harder and had case history's to help in his argument.

Okay I understood the first pdf minute but not the second. Can you help me out?

Maybe I just need to see 8/5 minutes to help me out?

 

[geevee]

Thanks Geevee, I thought you might agree.

I think if Juan felt he was justified about the bike and Hagg he would have fought harder and had case history's to help in his argument.

Okay I understood the first pdf minute but not the second. Can you help me out?

Maybe I just need to see 8/5 minutes to help me out?

Those were the only two minute entries the search turned up, don't know when they'll get around to posting the 8/5 minutes. Mostly they are just the pre-trial motions stuff, what pros/def wanted to put in or keep out, not a lot of detail in their entries, they read more like a law book. lol

I've got Day 2 part 2 on now, was in door breach he** there for a while, good gravy, Mehrens is like a dog with a chewed up bone.

I'm not sure what the jury made of officer V's testimony, we understand why he's so careful with his testimony but I have concerns about how they viewed it.

 

[josie1986]

I think I'll spend the weekend going over the testimony from the beginning and watch what little video there was of it.

I hope we have live feed for closings.

Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

 

[geevee]

You know, I've noticed that the prosecution hasn't tried very hard to humanize Danny, only one pic of him sitting on the couch (pre-death) that I've ever seen, no testimony about him really except for those few moments before RC killed him. I wonder what picture the jury has had to make of him on their own when even as late as last Thursday he was still being called 'the suspect' even by JM, instead of 'the victim' of the man on trial?

 

[josie1986]

You know, I've noticed that the prosecution hasn't tried very hard to humanize Danny, only one pic of him sitting on the couch (pre-death) that I've ever seen, no testimony about him really except for those few moments before RC killed him. I wonder what picture the jury has had to make of him on their own when even as late as last Thursday he was still being called 'the suspect' even by JM, instead of 'the victim' of the man on trial?

maybe juan will cover that in his 2nd closing,will be the last thing the jury hears so i assume it would stick with them since its fresh in their minds

 

[geevee]

I'm watching Day 4, here's a pic of the 'knife' Daniel had:

Here's where it was before moving things to see it:

Here are some other screen shots I took:

 

[josie1986]

Wait is the knife that big massive thing in the first photo? But it was under all those bags?

Cause he could totally have moved all that stuff in a blink of an eye to stab RC.....sureee

Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

 

[geevee]

Wait is the knife that big massive thing in the first photo? But it was under all those bags?

Cause he could totally have moved all that stuff in a blink of an eye to stab RC.....sureee

Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

Must have been where he was driving his bike to...:facepalm:

When Mehrens showed that pic to Det. Porter he asked him what that was in the corner, and when Porter didn't recognize it, Mehrens said 'It's...it's..a weapon..isn't it?' Like he was just so awed, and Porter was so unobservant.

 

[Zuri]

Wait is the knife that big massive thing in the first photo? But it was under all those bags?

Cause he could totally have moved all that stuff in a blink of an eye to stab RC.....sureee

Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

Josie, that is the hunting bow in the top pic. IIRC, there was a pocket knife in one of DR pockets when they emptied them posthumously.

 

[josie1986]

Josie, that is the hunting bow in the top pic. IIRC, there was a pocket knife in one of DR pockets when they emptied them posthumously.

I see that now,that is some piece of weaponry, but not something that could be easily grabbed and used.

Even though they found a knife on Daniel after he was killed,RC didn't know it was there so he still killed unlawfully.

I'm actually becoming very anxious to how the jury will see this,and the verdict they will give. I fear if they find him not guilty and he is re-instated he will do it again.

Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

 

[geevee]

Josie, that is the hunting bow in the top pic. IIRC, there was a pocket knife in one of DR pockets when they emptied them posthumously.

Thanks Zuri, I missed what the knife was and where it was found, this thing in the corner looks like a huge dagger and Mehrens' sounded so agog. lol

 

[josie1986]

Thanks Zuri, I missed what the knife was and where it was found, this thing in the corner looks like a huge dagger and Mehrens' sounded so agog. lol

That's that I thought it was,that's why I was like what the heck?



Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

 

[MeeBee]

I'm not saying it's fishy that Stephens was taken off the case and the current judge put on. I am just wondering why. It can't be that she has the Arias trial going, as she had many other trials and cases going while she was presiding over the Arias trial and it was never an issue save for occasional start time delays. The Arias trial is currently in limbo as it is so that cannot be it. But I am also not even close to saying it's some grand conspiracy to get Chrisman off. There are tough judges and lenient ones and fair ones and biased ones all the time. It's just the luck of the draw. I know that attorneys have their favorites and their not so favorites. Given his history with the MCCA's office, I'd say Juan is probably not a huge fan. But you deal. You press on. That's just what you have to do. It's still frustrating.

I just like Stephens. I never got any hint of bias from her, though at times she would become frustrated at one side or another. Her rulings were always fair and made with careful consideration. I respect her. I think she would have been more fair. In any case, I can see this judge's bias every time he looks at or speaks to Martinez. He just doesn't like him and it's affecting his rulings. But whatever. I am sure this is not the first rogue judge Juan has ever had to deal with. In fact, I know it's not. Juan still has enough to work with though and I am sure he will bring it all home tomorrow in his closings.

 

[aa9511]

Those were the only two minute entries the search turned up, don't know when they'll get around to posting the 8/5 minutes. Mostly they are just the pre-trial motions stuff, what pros/def wanted to put in or keep out, not a lot of detail in their entries, they read more like a law book. lol

I've got Day 2 part 2 on now, was in door breach he** there for a while, good gravy, Mehrens is like a dog with a chewed up bone.

I'm not sure what the jury made of officer V's testimony, we understand why he's so careful with his testimony but I have concerns about how they viewed it.

bbm

Geevee, I'm afraid of that, too. I think everything happened real fast, that explains why Virgillo was at the breach a lot of the time, also as we see in the pics, the room was very small so it makes sense that he would have been there when he was not in action with pepper spray, taser, etc..

However, this real-time thing could be favorable for Chrisman too. For example, I'm a little apprehensive that Juan didn't go into TOO much detail on Chrisman's cross, detail about what exactly happened and movements of Chrisman and Danny, b/c then they might think that well, anything dissected like that no one is gonna rememeber exactly where their feet were and exactly what motions they arms took, etc.. So what if that causes them to sort of lessen the effect of Juan's cross on Chrisman?