- Joined
- Sep 17, 2011
- Messages
- 399
- Reaction score
- 2,196
I hope not.Ditto. I wouldn't patronize them at all. I didn't even know about them since I dropped off the grid for so many years. Will they survive when Court TV is back in play?
I hope not.Ditto. I wouldn't patronize them at all. I didn't even know about them since I dropped off the grid for so many years. Will they survive when Court TV is back in play?
Shoot... not bad for a weeks worth of work and a few hours of testimony LOL ANDDDDD if that is US funds, he's kicking butt living in Canada![]()
The software alone he uses is over 5k per year. That doesn’t account for his experience and schooling, travel, etc. you are trying to compare apples to oranges here.How much money was Chased accused of murdering JM for? If you think that's a lot of money, then $14,000 is a lot. If you think $14,000 is not much, then that amount wasn't a lot.
you mean she wasn't talking about the judge? haha
The software alone he uses is over 5k per year. That doesn’t account for his experience and schooling, travel, etc. you are trying to compare apples to oranges here.
I would have to listen again, but I think maybe they got the reports, they wanted bench notes, notes, etc. Will listen again later
To be clear though... the prosecutor's have done the same ocean. They did it with Dr. Rudin (remember there was a hearing and we found out that notes, etc. were also not handed over but the defense didn't contact him directly to ask), the witness that is testifying today was only hired after they decided to not call Dr. Rudin, so they actually did not give the defense 30 days either, which apparently, is permissible LOL I think the argument that the defense was saying, they gave them a list, but they have not decided who they are calling and when they do, they will notify the prosecutor's (paraphrasing). There was a hearing early on in this case and the prosecutor said the same thing, and they told the defense they can "find" contact information in the police reports, etc. <<< IMO that was not very 'ethical' either, but it is what it is lol
This isn't a pro defense, or pro prosecutor thing... this is just how it's done there from my understanding throughout this trial IMO
And probably every trial. I don't have the experience of following crimes as you and Ocean and many others, but to me this is how the game is played. Sounds cold but it is what it is. Each side vying to win. Stretching the rules as much as they can. And the type and demeanor of lawyers does play a part, IMO, though we are told it shouldn't. It's human nature. Daugherty is rather dull. I think Imes is better. I happen to like both the defense attorneys. They have passion and are fighting fiercely for their client. They appear to really believe in his innocence. No clue how the jury views them. MOO.I would have to listen again, but I think maybe they got the reports, they wanted bench notes, notes, etc. Will listen again later
To be clear though... the prosecutor's have done the same ocean. They did it with Dr. Rudin (remember there was a hearing and we found out that notes, etc. were also not handed over but the defense didn't contact him directly to ask), the witness that is testifying today was only hired after they decided to not call Dr. Rudin, so they actually did not give the defense 30 days either, which apparently, is permissible LOL I think the argument that the defense was saying, they gave them a list, but they have not decided who they are calling and when they do, they will notify the prosecutor's (paraphrasing). There was a hearing early on in this case and the prosecutor said the same thing, and they told the defense they can "find" contact information in the police reports, etc. <<< IMO that was not very 'ethical' either, but it is what it is lol
This isn't a pro defense, or pro prosecutor thing... this is just how it's done there from my understanding throughout this trial IMO
@Tortoise Sorry, I wasn't sure where you'd got to so went ahead and posted the tweets. (Back to you nowdeleted duplicated tweet
How much money was Chased accused of murdering JM for? If you think that's a lot of money, then $14,000 is a lot. If you think $14,000 is not much, then that amount wasn't a lot.
Joey's email said Chase owed $42,845, and then he wrote himself cheques totaling $15,845 from the 2nd to the 8th, and who knows what else he received after that without providing the goods.How much money was Chased accused of murdering JM for? If you think that's a lot of money, then $14,000 is a lot. If you think $14,000 is not much, then that amount wasn't a lot.
Hey don't apologise, I went AWOL. If there's anymore tonight I'll post them but it's gone quiet again.@Tortoise Sorry, I wasn't sure where you'd got to so went ahead and posted the tweets. (Back to you now)
He is doing a spectacular job!!!!! I messaged him earlier to let him knowI don't like using my personal twitter... I need to make a 2nd twitter account for the cases I follow lol
deleted duplicate tweets
My doubt about this case is the lack of convincing evidence. Regrettably, I can totally "fathom how a man, a father and a friend could be capable [originally spelling corrected] of such horror", given so many horrible news reports about man murdering their own children and wife. And it's more than likely this crime was committed by a man or men who were or are fathers and were friend(s) to Joseph or otherwise very close to Joseph. Joseph couldn't have fathomed that, but many of us can. However, regarding to the current accused, there is nothing I've read or heard about in this case that suggests he either has the violent nature, or the motive, or the capability to torture Joseph and murder this entire family.
I was comparing money to money. As for schooling, it seems he only has a bachelor degree:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/eugene-liscio-a9265030/
Education
Rob deserves more than $14,000 compensation, then.
If the DT doesn't know who in the heck they are going to have testify at this late juncture, then they are the most ill prepared DT I've ever seen. WTH have they been doing all the time they have had no court?
Imo
And probably every trial. I don't have the experience of following crimes as you and Ocean and many others, but to me this is how the game is played. Sounds cold but it is what it is. Each side vying to win. Stretching the rules as much as they can. And the type and demeanor of lawyers does play a part, IMO, though we are told it shouldn't. It's human nature. Daugherty is rather dull. I think Imes is better. I happen to like both the defense attorneys. They have passion and are fighting fiercely for their client. They appear to really believe in his innocence. No clue how the jury views them. MOO.
Requirement or not, what we have so far is not sufficient.
Not sure why Susan would be scared of the friend of her son who was concerned about his welfare and urged them to visit the house. As for motive, Dan Kavanaugh.