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

[geevee]

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.



killjoy

Nice to see you again, A.D.A, I also worry about the impact of this down the road, do the right thing and damn the rest of your life, who would chance it? Aside from the unfairness of it, wouldn't they logically want SV testifying for them in their suit? Maybe their attny is of the mind to just sue 'em all and let the judge or jury sort it out, idk. But it seems quite the punitive move against the man who helped make sure the guy who killed your son was held accountable in some manner.

 

[josie1986]

Just checking in,I miss you guys

Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

 

[Cherry]

Me too I can't stand it when there are no live trials. Boo Hiss!

 

[aa9511]

Just checking in,I miss you guys

Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

Me too!! :juanettes: So fun being a Juanette with you all!

 

[aa9511]

http://www.azfamily.com/home/Prosecutor-mulls-retrial-for-ex-Phoenix-officer-225112812.html

 

[Jewels53]

http://www.azfamily.com/home/Prosecutor-mulls-retrial-for-ex-Phoenix-officer-225112812.html

From you link aa:

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery says "there is a distinct possibility" that he will seek to retry Chrisman on the murder and animal cruelty charges, but he won't rule out a plea deal.

I think it will depend on what the sentence is that the Judge Granville impose's on RC. If RC receive's a long sentence then I do think he will plea out on the other charges, it not then he may take his chances. That is if the prosecutor's office offer's a plea deal. all imo though

 

[geevee]

From you link aa:




I think it will depend on what the sentence is that the Judge Granville impose's on RC. If RC receive's a long sentence then I do think he will plea out on the other charges, it not then he may take his chances. That is if the prosecutor's office offer's a plea deal. all imo though

Thanks for the article, I was just coming here for a similar reason (aside from missing you all :grouphug - I finally (geez I'm so slow) figured out how to easily see all of the minute entries, go here:

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/

Put the case number without hyphen (in this case, it's CR2010153913) into the Case Number field, then click the Retrieve Minute Entries and the entire raft of Minutes are shown. I had been adding the names into the fields and getting few if any results. Duh me.

I read through a couple early ones and all of those from JSS' last through the trial. There is a status conference scheduled on the sentencing date (Oct. 18th) for them to discuss retrial on counts 1 and 3, so we should have some idea shortly afterwards whether they'll retry him or if a plea deal will be worked out (unless the status conference is delayed), but like mentioned above, the sentence could impact the retrial/plea deal decision.

 

[aa9511]

From you link aa:




I think it will depend on what the sentence is that the Judge Granville impose's on RC. If RC receive's a long sentence then I do think he will plea out on the other charges, it not then he may take his chances. That is if the prosecutor's office offer's a plea deal. all imo though

Yeah, it's a hard one to call what either side is gonna do here, because with him being a cop (EX-cop!) and all, who knows what the next jury is gonna look like. I think it will end up being like you said.

 

[Karmady]

Yeah, it's a hard one to call what either side is gonna do here, because with him being a cop (EX-cop!) and all, who knows what the next jury is gonna look like. I think it will end up being like you said.

I just heard in the car that the alternate juror was interviewed and felt that Chrisman was innocent. They played parts of the interview with him and he said he felt the jury was swayed by the media and Juan's high profile from the Arias trial and that he told the jurors and Juan that after the verdict. He also said it that Virgilio changed his testimony twice on the stand in response to prosecution questioning. He didn't say what those two times were, though. At least not in what I heard. I'm not seeing it up in print yet, but it was Nicole Franks on KFYI reporting.

 

[josie1986]

I'm surprised the jurors haven't spoken yet. Apart from the alternate of course but he doesn't count

Sent from my 'alternate reality' using my hippocampus

 

[Jewels53]

I am just dropping by to tell all of you how much I am missing you!

Just about 2 1/2 weeks before RC receive's his sentence. May it be a long one for Justice for Daniel.

 

[aa9511]

I just heard in the car that the alternate juror was interviewed and felt that Chrisman was innocent. They played parts of the interview with him and he said he felt the jury was swayed by the media and Juan's high profile from the Arias trial and that he told the jurors and Juan that after the verdict. He also said it that Virgilio changed his testimony twice on the stand in response to prosecution questioning. He didn't say what those two times were, though. At least not in what I heard. I'm not seeing it up in print yet, but it was Nicole Franks on KFYI reporting.

OMG....thank you for telling us what you heard! That is just crazy!! I'm so glad he wasn't in deliberations!! :scared::scared::scared: It could have been hung even on agg. assault - agghh!!!! :scared::scared:

But I thought both of the alternate jurors told Judge Granville that they both agreed with the guilty-agg. assault verdict?

As far as what he said about Vergillo, haven't heard the interview yet, but I think this juror got thrown by the fact that Ofc. Vergillo was purposefully being verrryyyy careful when answering defense questions, b/c I think he knew he was their main witness to tear down and they would use all of his words a/g him if he made the slightest mistake or inconsistency, which THEY DID TRY. Mehrens in fact used his testimony WORD FOR WORD, put a copy of his exact words up on the screen. I think anyone, even if answering truthfully, they can twist around anyone's words, Vergillo knew he had to be careful.

So maybe he thought this meant Vergillo was hiding something?

 

[aa9511]

Hi all, I haven't been able to find a link for the interview Karmady was referring to with the alternate juror. If anyone finds it, can you please post here? TIA! Very interested to hear what he said, although I know I won't like it....

Karmady, can you give us any more details on what he said, as far as did he give any answers about why Chrisman shot him UNARMED, did he really think the bicycle was a threat, what did he think happened? And what about Vergillo, obviously he thinks he lied, but what did he believe was the motivation for him lying? Did he really believe Chrisman was alone in the room with Danny? TIA. Any details you can remember would be great!

 

[Jewels53]

I hope this shows up


http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.g...rtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2010-153913


Ok it doesn't work. Click on case history and type in Chrisman and then Richard and it will show an entry for 9/27.

Geevee you are better at this.

 

[geevee]

I hope this shows up


http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.g...rtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2010-153913


Ok it doesn't work. Click on case history and type in Chrisman and then Richard and it will show an entry for 9/27.

Geevee you are better at this.

Woohoo, thanks Jewels:

9/27/2013 MOT - Motion - Party (001) 9/27/2013

NOTE: MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL (Rule 24.1) Oral Argument Requested

 

[Karmady]

Hi all, I haven't been able to find a link for the interview Karmady was referring to with the alternate juror. If anyone finds it, can you please post here? TIA! Very interested to hear what he said, although I know I won't like it....

Karmady, can you give us any more details on what he said, as far as did he give any answers about why Chrisman shot him UNARMED, did he really think the bicycle was a threat, what did he think happened? And what about Vergillo, obviously he thinks he lied, but what did he believe was the motivation for him lying? Did he really believe Chrisman was alone in the room with Danny? TIA. Any details you can remember would be great!

I heard it twice on the same day. Both times it was on one of the every half-hour (?) news breaks on KFYI and both times it was Nicole Franks doing the intro, so probably just a re-run the second time. I heard it once in the morning and again on my way home from a dinner that got done at 9 pm. I haven't been able to find it either. I even checked the KFYI website when I originally posted, but not since. I do remember that she said the interview was WITH KFYI which is kind of unusual ime.

There was nothing more to it than what I posted since it was just the news "updates" which last like two minutes total. But the clip was a man talking and the clip was introduced as an alternate juror speaking. He didn't say anything (that I heard) about the details of the case or his reasoning.

Swear on a stack of Bibles I'm not making it up and I only had one very lightly poured glass of wine at dinner

 

[Jewels53]

Woohoo, thanks Jewels:

9/27/2013 MOT - Motion - Party (001) 9/27/2013

NOTE: MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL (Rule 24.1) Oral Argument Requested

So it is up to us to keep this thread alive not only for the assault sentencing but for another trial. Unless we start a new thread when it gets closer to a maybe new trial.

 

[geevee]

So it is up to us to keep this thread alive not only for the assault sentencing but for another trial. Unless we start a new thread when it gets closer to a maybe new trial.

I believe we're up to the task.

 

[aa9511]

I heard it twice on the same day. Both times it was on one of the every half-hour (?) news breaks on KFYI and both times it was Nicole Franks doing the intro, so probably just a re-run the second time. I heard it once in the morning and again on my way home from a dinner that got done at 9 pm. I haven't been able to find it either. I even checked the KFYI website when I originally posted, but not since. I do remember that she said the interview was WITH KFYI which is kind of unusual ime.

There was nothing more to it than what I posted since it was just the news "updates" which last like two minutes total. But the clip was a man talking and the clip was introduced as an alternate juror speaking. He didn't say anything (that I heard) about the details of the case or his reasoning.

Swear on a stack of Bibles I'm not making it up and I only had one very lightly poured glass of wine at dinner [/QUOTE]

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

No Karmady of course I would not think you were making it up...just tried to find it somewhere so I could listen to the (thankfully!) alternate juror and then yell and break a glass or something. LOL! I get now about the news update and that it was very short and just snippets of what he said. They might have even bombarded him on the street or something like they tried to do with the Arias jurors. If it was a sit-down, hopefully they'll put up the whole interview soon.

 

[aa9511]

I hope this shows up


http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.g...rtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2010-153913


Ok it doesn't work. Click on case history and type in Chrisman and then Richard and it will show an entry for 9/27.

Geevee you are better at this.

Woohoo!! But does this mean it's for certain that it's going to re-trial? Also what does the "oral arguments" mean...what exactly r they gonna argue?