CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #12

[citygirl]

Leticia Juarez‏ @ABC7Leticia 1m1 minute ago
Javis told investigators her dad gambled at the casino. He was a good poker player. He went to the casino sometimes to gamble to make money for car payments. Her parents argued about money because he would put a lot of money back in the business not over gambling


In my opinion, the ABOVE tweet shows that she believes her father's BS. Gambling addicts don't go to the casino to make money for car payments. They go to feed their compulsion. I wonder how many car payments he ever actually 'won' by going to the casino?

And I don't believe that he ever 'invested his $ back into the business.' I think that is as lie he told to cover his gambling losses. JMO

I am NOT calling his poor daughter a liar. I am calling her another one of his victims.

Well, according to today's testimony, If I heard it right, Mom said Dad only came home once with any winnings. It was confusing because it was during a visit to the jail.

 

[JMarsh]

That’s good then.

I’m sure the defense will provide who the DNA belongs to.

Still can’t explain how CM’s DNA was not on the passenger side. Think the Judge talked about that.

IMO

They may not be able to. If there hasn't been a CODIS match, then they would actually have to have a suspect to test the DNA against. They have asked the DA to test certain DNA against Dan K, that they said in opening.

 

[katydid23]

I don't know....i really want to hear from CJ lol and holy....this is the testimony that I want to "see"! Demeanor can be everything. Unlike others, I can't discount her testimony just because she is his daughter, it's interesting to learn that cj and Merritt argued about him not answering, this is something that I could see being memorable in a 15 yr olds mind.

One thing I would like to know and maybe we will learn when we got the audio, When exactly was she interviewed? 2010 or 2013/14?

HOLD ON though....I thought the call never went through...right? It didnt connect. So how would they be arguing over a call that didnt show up or connect?

 

[katydid23]

Well, according to today's testimony, If I heard it right, Mom said Dad only came home once with any winnings. It was confusing because it was during a visit to the jail.

Exactly. All those casino visits and he brought 'winnings' home one time. It is revealing.

 

[Meemaw12]

HOLD ON though....I thought the call never went through...right? It didnt connect. So how would they be arguing over a call that didnt show up or connect?

Oh no your in the rabbit hole with me. Here take my hand and let’s get out.

 

[katydid23]

Because she was a kid when all this happened, and she was asked about that night FOUR years after the event. Taylor wasn't questioned in 2010. She was questioned in 2014.

And 4 years later, she, at 15, remembers seeing her father, not taking a call from his boss, and she wonders about it?

 

[Meemaw12]

They may not be able to. If there hasn't been a CODIS match, then they would actually have to have a suspect to test the DNA against. They have asked the DA to test certain DNA against Dan K, that they said in opening.

Umm well I don’t believe the Defense would want DK tested. They wouldn’t be able to blame him if it came back not his, they may say they wanted it but IMO doubtful.

IMO

 

[JMarsh]

Umm well I don’t believe the Defense would DK tested. They wouldn’t be able to blame him if it came back not his,

IMO

The DA could have contradicted their statement, and he didn't. So...

It's there on the record. Click on the youtube video.

 

[citygirl]

Wut?

This is insane

The defence have clearly manufactured bogus testimony here

All respect lost for mcgee

The voice of reason has arrived!

 

[oceanblueeyes]

WOW!! pissed we won't get to see this. IIRC someone said that his daughter was boasting on the L&C chat "just wait until the defense puts on their case" etc.
Seems she isn't so confident today. While part of me wants to feel sorry for her, another part of me doesn't. It takes true courage to tell the truth when it's your family member who committed a crime.

Additionally - her testimony seems like a huge mistake for the defense. They had to have anticipated it wouldn't stand up to her previous interviews and should have known the pros. would call her out based on the taped jailhouse interviews. I'm not sure how she bolstered his defense at all and it was a mistake for them to call her. I can only imagine CJ's testimony will be more of the same.

Yep, CJs will be rinse, and repeat.

Imo

 

[asyousay]

HOLD ON though....I thought the call never went through...right? It didnt connect. So how would they be arguing over a call that didnt show up or connect?

Oh no your in the rabbit hole with me. Here take my hand and let’s get out.

I said the same earlier I don’t get this, by default this makes the daughter a liar off the bat.

And if Cathy claims the same then she is automatically lying as well.

No such phone call happened as Chase’s mobile phone was off the grid.

 

[travelbug]

At first it looked like Sara, but it's Taylor. I don't know if he even has as a daughter named Sara.

She is both...
BBM

Leticia Juarez‏ @ABC7Leticia 4s5 seconds ago
Sara Taylor Jarvis is first defense witness. She is Merritt's daughter. She is an elementary/ middle school science teacher.

 

[JMarsh]

I said the same earlier I don’t get this, by default this makes the daughter a liar off the bat.

And if Cathy claims the same then she is automatically lying as well.

No such phone call happened as Chase’s mobile phone was off the grid.

You are forgetting that the defense has already shown that not all of Chase's known calls, pinged. They are bringing in phone experts. This is just an intro to the rebuttal.

"Intro to the Rebuttal"-should be a rap tune.

 

[JMarsh]

She is both...
BBM

How is she both?

 

[citygirl]

Yep, CJs will be rinse, and repeat.

Imo

From the sounds of it I think the PT did a good job discrediting her. Just hope they didn't come on too strong because sometimes that can backfire. And she did end up in tears. Hard to image why the DT would subject her to it. MOO.

 

[asyousay]

You are forgetting that the defense has already shown that not all of Chase's known calls, pinged. They are bringing in phone experts. This is just an entro to the rebuttal.

"Entro to the Rebuttal"-should be a rap tune.

Well I will wait to see if phone records show that the phone did connect to Chase’s phone coz at the moment I’m not buying it. But if they do have proof then i shall be very impressed.

 

[ehenson88]

I'm not trying to be critical, but I do wonder how in this day and age people still just believe whatever they are told on-line. Anyone could have used her name or pretended to be her. Those who have followed this case for long enough probably all heard her interview with Baker. A little healthy cynicism is useful when navigating these chat rooms, I think.

It's like people who claim to be lawyers, yet don't know the first thing about stare decisis.

I wasn't saying it was for sure her, but many said it seemed credible based on her comments - she wasn't in court that day but was watching online due to school, work, etc. If it wasn't her I don't really see the draw for someone to be impersonating her, the person wasn't offering insider info or anything just making claims about the strength of the defenses case... Either way it doesn't matter

 

[citygirl]

Well I will wait to see if phone records show that the phone did connect to Chase’s phone coz at the moment I’m not buying it. But if they do have proof then i shall very impressed.

Battle of the experts. Jury decides who to believe.

 

[QueenBofOB]

No. Hired counsel.

Where did this leech get the money--steal it?

 

[smr]

I remember after the OJ case. Don’t remember exact words, of course. Someone asked: “Well, will you keep trying to find the guilty person now?” And the LE person snarled: “We found the guilty person.”

What's the point? The McStay case is not OJ Simpson case. Chase Merritt is not being tried for murder of his ex-wife and her friend. IF Chase is acquitted, chances are it's not because some gloves don't fit.

On the other hand, you can't deny that there have been cases where innocent people were wrongly convicted and sentenced, who years later were declared innocent (some posthumously) when the real guilty parties confessed or were discovered via DNA or other evidence.

 

[missy1974]

I'm not trying to be critical, but I do wonder how in this day and age people still just believe whatever they are told on-line. Anyone could have used her name or pretended to be her. Those who have followed this case for long enough probably all heard her interview with Baker. A little healthy cynicism is useful when navigating these chat rooms, I think.

It's like people who claim to be lawyers, yet don't know the first thing about stare decisis.

Oh, I agree! And even if it was her, she didn't say anything that means anything, if that makes sense lol