GUILTY AZ - Daniel Rodriguez, 29, fatally shot by Phoenix PD officer, 5 Oct 2010 #3

[josie1986]

PHOENIX - Inside the 4th Avenue jail there is an area detention officers call the "SMU."

It stands for "Special Management Unit."

"It's for the worst of the worst, but at times, like this it's for high profile inmates such as former law enforcement officers," said Sheriff Joe Arpaio while giving ABC15 an inside look the ultra-secure area.

Former Phoenix police officer Richard Chrisman is being held in the special management unit according to deputies.
--
More:

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/regio...enix-officer-held-in-most-secure-part-of-jail

i take great joy in knowing that he hardly leaves that tiny cell :floorlaugh:

i love love love Arpaio,wish people over here worked like him.

 

[Zuri]

PHOENIX - Inside the 4th Avenue jail there is an area detention officers call the "SMU."

It stands for "Special Management Unit."

"It's for the worst of the worst, but at times, like this it's for high profile inmates such as former law enforcement officers," said Sheriff Joe Arpaio while giving ABC15 an inside look the ultra-secure area.

Former Phoenix police officer Richard Chrisman is being held in the special management unit according to deputies.
--
More:

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/regio...enix-officer-held-in-most-secure-part-of-jail

Aaron Hernandez, the former NE Patriots football player accused of murder, is in this type of cell for his own safety in Massachusetts. I imagine RC is a tad worried about being in the prison with purportedly Hispanic gang members. The fact that he planted drug paraphernalia on a homeless black woman is not going to sit well with black inmates either. The fact he is a cop will not sit well with anybody regardless of ethnicity. The isolation from people is going to be his undoing as he seemed to thrive on comraderie IMO. Depression, fear, boredom, anxiety, social isolation, monotony... Bet it ages him 20 years. JMV

 

[aa9511]

http://thetrialdivas.files.wordpres...-jury-questions-in-richard-chrisman-trial.pdf

Found this on Trial Diva website - apparently there were a gazillion juror questions, which we did NOT know about!! :facepalm:

Trial Diva also wrote this: "While we had heard from the court that the Judge was running in and out of the jury room to answer questions in between other proceedings it was not disclosed when these questions were happening or if in fact there really were any. " Here is the link: http://thetrialdivas.com/2013/09/19/richard-chrisman-document-reveals-why-juror-15-was-excused/

First of all, that is confusing that she says they heard that judge was going back and forth answering juror questions, but then says but we didn't know if there really were any.

Secondly, I am disappointed that in the two Arizona cases (Arias and Chrisman), the juror questions are kept so secret. Even if the defendant (Chrisman) wasn't there, shouldn't it be held in open court since it is supposted to be a PUBLIC trial. How is the public supposed to know that the jury deliberations are being held in a fair manner when all of their questions/answers are held secret? I find that to be not in the interest of a fair and public trial. So tired of the judges trying to keep everything secret just b/c it's supposedly a "high-profile" trial, when Chrisman wasn't even that high-profile. In the other trials, I've seen the judges read out loud all the questions in open court, and they are not so secretive about everything.

Thirdly, does anyone know where we can find what the exact questions were and the answers that the judge gave for those questions?

 

[aa9511]

Looked up some of the other minute entries for the period jury was in deliberation - counted 8 jury questions on Wednesday 9/11 (day after case was submitted to them around 3:30 pm Tuesday), 1 jury question Thursday 9/1.

Can you believe we sat there whole time thinking there were no jury questions? Still irks me.

 

[aa9511]

Also, again if anyone knows where I can find the exact jury questions, please let me know. TIA. I am googling it but can't find any information on where to go to get that information. I know in CMJA's trial, the questions were later released, I'm assuming the media requested them. Does someone have to request it and how does that work? TIA!

 

[aa9511]

http://ktar.com/22/1663909/Report-Family-suing-Richard-Chrismans-former-partner

Not sure I agree with this, but I understand why they did it....

 

[josie1986]

http://ktar.com/22/1663909/Report-Family-suing-Richard-Chrismans-former-partner

Not sure I agree with this, but I understand why they did it....

really? as much as i feel terrible for daniels family there really is no need to go after Officer V.....imo he is the biggest reason they got RC convicted!

i get going after the city but not him.

he risked a lot by testifying against RC and this is what he gets in return...thats nice of them!

 

[geevee]

I really wish they wouldn't do this, I'm not sure how they're going to prove this:

"Lindstrom said Virgillo did not do what he was supposed to do: protect Rodriguez.

"He was supposed to keep him safe and he didn't do that, whether it was faulty training or he just wasn't doing his job correctly," she said."
--

I just don't think you're going to convince a jury that one cop is supposed to protect a civilian from another cop - was SV supposed to shoot RC? I just see more trauma and heartache ahead for the family by going after SV - and I don't think he deserves it. The city/PPD? Certainly, but SV should be dropped from the suit, or amend it and refile without him.

No, I just don't like this at all.

 

[geevee]

Also, again if anyone knows where I can find the exact jury questions, please let me know. TIA. I am googling it but can't find any information on where to go to get that information. I know in CMJA's trial, the questions were later released, I'm assuming the media requested them. Does someone have to request it and how does that work? TIA!

I don't know how it works, if you look at Arias' docket, there are a few hundred jury questions throughout the trial and I haven't seen them show up in typed form (except those released), I don't know how to get the rest in that case or RC's.

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.g...archResults.asp?lastName=Arias&FirstName=Jodi

I haven't read the Diva links yet about it but this judge handled things somewhat differently than JSS, that's for sure.

 

[geevee]

On RC's docket:

9/23/2013 012 - ME: Trial - Party (001) 9/23/2013
9/20/2013 MVJ - Motion To Vacate Judgment - Party (001) 9/20/2013
NOTE: Motion to Vacate Judgment of Aggravating Factor: "Emotional Harm"


Not surprised by the motion to vacate, but what 'trial' is happening on the 23rd? The sentencing isn't until October 18th, is judge holding the hearing on the motion to vacate the aggravating factor? We must stay tuned.

 

[aa9511]

really? as much as i feel terrible for daniels family there really is no need to go after Officer V.....imo he is the biggest reason they got RC convicted!

i get going after the city but not him.

he risked a lot by testifying against RC and this is what he gets in return...thats nice of them!

Yes, I agree, and it kinda by default gives support to the defense b/c what they're saying is Officer V didn't do enough to stop the situation. So by default that is supporting the defense theory. I really think that's where the reasonable doubt came in for the 2 jurors, that why did Officer V participate in the pepper spray and why did he taser Danny? This is what I very strongly believe was hanging up the 2 jurors. Also when Chrisman was pointing the gun at Danny, why didn't Officer V try to stop him? I'm not meaning to discredit Officer V AT ALL, these are just legitimate questions that I don't feel like Juan really addressed. I'm sure there are good answers.

If it goes to re-trial, Juan needs to do a better job of explaining that and explaining why Officer V participated up until that poiint. That would be my advice to Juan, as if he's gonna listen...hahahha!

 

[aa9511]

I don't know how it works, if you look at Arias' docket, there are a few hundred jury questions throughout the trial and I haven't seen them show up in typed form (except those released), I don't know how to get the rest in that case or RC's.

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.g...archResults.asp?lastName=Arias&FirstName=Jodi

I haven't read the Diva links yet about it but this judge handled things somewhat differently than JSS, that's for sure.

Thanks geevee, I"m specifically looking for the jury quest. from deliberations. I remember reading the ones from CMJA b/c I believe the media requested them afterwards - like the one where Foreman asked what form do we fill out if it's a non-verdict, or something like that.

I was reading online that a citizen can go to the courthouse and request to see all the documents, but that's not possible for me....LOL. I wish the media would request them (at the very least the juror questions from deliberations).

 

[aa9511]

I really wish they wouldn't do this, I'm not sure how they're going to prove this:

"Lindstrom said Virgillo did not do what he was supposed to do: protect Rodriguez.

"He was supposed to keep him safe and he didn't do that, whether it was faulty training or he just wasn't doing his job correctly," she said."
--

I just don't think you're going to convince a jury that one cop is supposed to protect a civilian from another cop - was SV supposed to shoot RC? I just see more trauma and heartache ahead for the family by going after SV - and I don't think he deserves it. The city/PPD? Certainly, but SV should be dropped from the suit, or amend it and refile without him.

No, I just don't like this at all.

Agreed. Whatever lawyer advised them of this is making a mistake. I'm sure it wasn't Juan b/c they must have their own attorney to handle the civil cases.

 

[LinasK]

I might follow that Hiccup girl trial every now and then, not sure yet though.

Too late, it's over with already. She's Guilty and got Life In Prison without Parole.

 

[A.D.A McCoy]

http://ktar.com/22/1663909/Report-Family-suing-Richard-Chrismans-former-partner

Not sure I agree with this, but I understand why they did it....

Thanks for the report, aa9511. I disagree with including Officer Virgillo in the lawsuit.

really? as much as i feel terrible for daniels family there really is no need to go after Officer V.....imo he is the biggest reason they got RC convicted!

i get going after the city but not him.

he risked a lot by testifying against RC and this is what he gets in return...thats nice of them!

And this is pretty much why. The old adage about no good deed going unpunished, springs to mind.

I really wish they wouldn't do this, I'm not sure how they're going to prove this:

"Lindstrom said Virgillo did not do what he was supposed to do: protect Rodriguez.

"He was supposed to keep him safe and he didn't do that, whether it was faulty training or he just wasn't doing his job correctly," she said."
--

I just don't think you're going to convince a jury that one cop is supposed to protect a civilian from another cop - was SV supposed to shoot RC? I just see more trauma and heartache ahead for the family by going after SV - and I don't think he deserves it. The city/PPD? Certainly, but SV should be dropped from the suit, or amend it and refile without him.

No, I just don't like this at all.

Agree, leave Officer V out of it. I also wonder about the potential chilling effect such a suit could create. The cynic in me sees a cop wanting to come forward the next time something like this happens, but then deciding to close an eye, because it's just not worth it. Colleagues turning against you, smearing you, and to top it off, get sued by the victim's family. Talk about a miscarriage of justice.

Too late, it's over with already. She's Guilty and got Life In Prison without Parole.

killjoy

 

[josie1986]

Too late, it's over with already. She's Guilty and got Life In Prison without Parole.

i was just catching up on this as well. just my luck

 

[LinasK]

i was just catching up on this as well. just my luck

Hey, all's good. I was just checking back on this thread since things are slow and there's no news on Jodi Arias yet. Wonder how she's enjoying her solitude? Wonder what she's planning next???

 

[thefragile7393]

Thanks for the report, aa9511. I disagree with including Officer Virgillo in the lawsuit.



And this is pretty much why. The old adage about no good deed going unpunished, springs to mind.



Agree, leave Officer V out of it. I also wonder about the potential chilling effect such a suit could create. The cynic in me sees a cop wanting to come forward the next time something like this happens, but then deciding to close an eye, because it's just not worth it. Colleagues turning against you, smearing you, and to top it off, get sued by the victim's family. Talk about a miscarriage of justice.

I wish I could like this post even more. This guy has lost everything to do the right thing. The blue wall is such that I would be surprised if he would be able to ever get a job as a police officer went anywhere else. He had everything against him...and he was likely deep in shock when all this went down. No, I will never agree with including him. Ever. These people have no clue what this guy has gone through

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 4

 

[aa9511]

Hey, all's good. I was just checking back on this thread since things are slow and there's no news on Jodi Arias yet. Wonder how she's enjoying her solitude? Wonder what she's planning next???

LinasK, have you checked the Jodi Arias sidebar thread? There is A LOT of sidebar talk, but they also post whatever updates people find on the case (motions and things), you just have to sift through.

 

[aa9511]

I wish I could like this post even more. This guy has lost everything to do the right thing. The blue wall is such that I would be surprised if he would be able to ever get a job as a police officer went anywhere else. He had everything against him...and he was likely deep in shock when all this went down. No, I will never agree with including him. Ever. These people have no clue what this guy has gone through

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 4

Yes, and to begin with I'm sure he doesn't have a lot of money to begin with! I mean, he has to support a family after all, I think he's still married (?), but even if not then I'm sure he helps out mom and dad, etc..

I do not understand what this lawsuit is for, other than Elvira's lawyer wants more money, he somehow convinced her to do it. That's the only thing I can think of. I understand the part about how the suit says that Virgillo didn't do enough to stop the situation from getting to the point it did, in hindsight yes one can always find things that he should have done better. So I get that. But the person that was ultimately responsible for the tragedy is being held responsible, at least for part of it. Not to mention the other things you all have mentioned, such as Chrisman would have never even gone to trial had it not been for Vergillo! I don't understand this! It's also very confusing, b/c not only did Juan praise Vergillo as a hero for having the courage to stand up for what's right, but so did Bill Montgomery in his press release....but yet then the next day Vergillo's getting sued?? It's like okayyy so he's a hero but he still did something wrong?