CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #13

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #881
Maline didn't ask for this, but the judge did allow Maline to lead at times, which is what is allowed when a witness is "hostile". The judge allowed a good bit of leading questions on direct. Usually you are only allowed leading questions on cross.

Did he allow him or were objections made by the state because they were questions that never should have been asked, and sustained by the judge?

If he was allowing him to do so, then why did the judge tell Maline he was going to hold him in contempt of court?

Something doesn't compute.
 
  • #882
Did he allow him or were objections made by the state because they were questions that never should have been asked, and sustained by the judge?

If he was allowing him to do so, then why did the judge tell Maline he was going to hold him in contempt of court?

Something doesn't compute.

Don't know. It could be that Maline kept asking leading questions when he wasn't supposed to.
 
  • #883
An objection based on leading the witness would be an objection to an attorney asking questions of the witness which suggest the answer to the question within the question. For example, an attorney might object to leading the witness if the attorney in question asked, “You were at [this particular location] on [this particular night], correct?”
Etc.
Leading Questions - Trial | Laws.com

Thank you. Yes leading questions are asked, and then the witness is asked to answer with a simple, yes or no, without elaborating further.
 
  • #884
Right. And the difference between a leading & non-leading question is....?

Because this difference is key to the above.

Ocean is correct that the Judge will only declare the witness hostile if the witness is in effect refusing to answer - this didn't happen.

Of course in practice judges allow plenty of leeway to lead witnesses

But you are simply incorrect to claim the witness was hostile. This never was a defence witness, and also was not a witness refusing to answer.
 
  • #885
Don't know. It could be that Maline kept asking leading questions when he wasn't supposed to.

But you said he was allowed to in effect X the witness because the witness was hostile.

Which is it?
 
  • #886
Thank you. Yes leading questions are asked, and then the witness is asked to answer with a simple, yes or no, without elaborating further.

A leading question answers the question being asked.

A non-leading question is open ended.

Leading Question: When you spoke with the defendant did you tell him you were pregnant? Or When you spoke with the defendant, you told him you were pregnant, right?

Non-leading Question: What did you speak about with the defendant? OR What did you tell the defendant?
 
  • #887

Damn @Tortoise

This is so interesting that even in private with CJ he doesn't bother to go against key prosecution allegations

And just wow if CJ doesn't confirm everything we know about him

Cathy: You don’t stop doing the bad things that you do, you don’t think about the repercussions you don’t listen to other people when they’re trying to tell you that you’re not
 
  • #888
A leading question answers the question being asked.

A non-leading question is open ended.

Leading Question: When you spoke with the defendant did you tell him you were pregnant?

Are you legally qualified?

Because in practice this kind of question would be allowed depending on what came first.

It elicits a yes / no answer

We saw a practical example of this with the David Sequeida

The state wanted David Sequeida to say what he was warned about by the previous shop as regards Chase.

Defence objected - calls for hearsay

So state asked something to the effect

"without giving the detail of the conversation, were you warned about Chase"

Sequeida answered yes

This is not leading - for reasons of efficiency the Judge will allow counsel to get to the point
 
Last edited:
  • #889
To me, showing only a few minutes of an 8 hour long interrogation is absurd to me. JMO
True. But is the entire 8 hours relevant?
 
  • #890
A great way to learn about DNA is through the exhibits Kathleen Zellner published with her motions for the Steven Avery case. I'll get a link for those, or Missy may have one handy.

We don't always leave DNA. And no one, to my knowledge can say conclusively, why we sometimes leave it and sometimes we don't. Hygiene, it seems, can be a factor. So if you wash your hands a lot, you will likely leave less DNA than someone who rarely washes their hands.

What I suspect in the encounter between Joey and Chase on the 4th is, that before eating lunch that day both men washed their hands. So DNA from others they touched would either have been diminished or washed off.

They had a lunch that lasted a few hours, it would seem. And in that time they may have touched their face, or wiped their hands on pants, built up perspiration, who knows. At the end of the lunch they shake hands, or bro-hug, or pass off an object to each other. Say, Joey hands Chase checks, Chase hands Joey a cup, or paperwork-this may never be known for certain.

Joey gets in his Trooper, now Chase's DNA is on his hands, and there is just enough for DNA to be left primarily on the steering wheel, in slight amounts on other objects. And again, because we don't always leave DNA, not everything Joey touches gets DNA on it (one of the reports I posted mentions that the more pressure applied to an object, the more DNA left). This theory would explain why there is substantially more DNA left on the steering wheel, because when driving that is where the driver would place the most pressure.

There was the question as to why when Chase was in the Trooper 6 weeks prior, his DNA was not left on the passenger side of the Trooper. That could be because he was in one of those paint-ball outfits, and kept his gloves on. Or again, after playing paint ball he relieved himself, and washed his hands just prior to getting in the Trooper.

Lots of variables with this stuff.

OK, so AFTER Joey drove back from CFA, and left touch DNA from Chase on the steering wheel, someone drove the car to the border, right? And that was days later?

So why didnt that driver's DNA disrupt the fragile touch DNA left from lunch time drive on the 4th?
 
  • #891
Um. No.

On direct, which means the witness is "your" witness, an attorney is not allowed to lead the witness. So the questions are supposed to be open ended, like: "When you spoke to Blanche what did you talk about?" Not "When you spoke with Blanche you asked her about the table, right?" The second question is leading because the attorney basically answers the question they are asking, in a way.

On cross, the attorney can ask leading questions.

If an attorney asks permission to treat a witness as "hostile" it means they can ask leading questions.

Objection to Leading Question? Try Rephrasing - The Legal Seagull

This lenient judge has allowed leading questions by both sides, repeatedly.
 
  • #892
Ocean is correct that the Judge will only declare the witness hostile if the witness is in effect refusing to answer - this didn't happen.

Of course in practice judges allow plenty of leeway to lead witnesses

But you are simply incorrect to claim the witness was hostile. This never was a defence witness, and also was not a witness refusing to answer.

That will even happen if the defense calls DK. Imo.

Imo the judge will not even declare DK a hostile witness right of the bat before one question has been asked. .

Now the instant he refuses to answer questions the judge will let the defense declare him a hostile witness.

I've seen judges dress down attorneys who wants to declare someone a hostile witness before even asking the first question.

The judges refused since they had seen no basis or foundation at that time showing they should prematurely be declared hostile.

Judges must always have a good faith basis supporting all of their rulings, including declaring anyone a hostile witness in front of the jury.

Jmo
 
  • #893
But you said he was allowed to in effect X the witness because the witness was hostile.

Which is it?

Its sounds like to me Maline was up to his old game again. It seems the judge finally lost his patience AGAIN.

Imo, telling him if he didnt stop asking, not only leading questions during direct, but asking objectionable questions he already knew weren't to be asked in the first place, he was going to hold him in contempt.
 
  • #894
I think it's interesting that the defense is interested in the table.

If Chase didn't do it, what do they care about proving where the blood was shed?

It seems they must think it's proven Chase was in the house!

JMO
 
  • #895
This lenient judge has allowed leading questions by both sides, repeatedly.

It's actually fairly typical as you need to get on with the job

I remember when I was on profs back in the 90s our tutor taught us about leading but also said in practice you can lead the witness thru the nuts and bolts to get to the point

So for example, if the witness has testified she was pregnant and has been asked if she spoke to the defendant on the 19 March 2019, you can ask if she told him she was pregnant.
 
  • #896
I think it's interesting that the defense is interested in the table.

If Chase didn't do it, what do they care about proving where the blood was shed?

It seems they must think it's proven Chase was in the house!

JMO

Sure sounds like it Tortoise.

Why try to refute anything when they claim he wasn't in the McStay home on the day/night of the 4th?

I think they know the state has laid out very compelling evidence putting CM at the murder scene the night they were killed.

Imo
 
  • #897
Damn @Tortoise

This is so interesting that even in private with CJ he doesn't bother to go against key prosecution allegations

And just wow if CJ doesn't confirm everything we know about him
Also interesting to note that back in 2014 after hours of being grilled about her 3 hours of calls to Chase the evening of Feb 4th, Cathy never mentioned that she used to phone Chase in the clubhouse or that he was in the clubhouse, or the reception difficulties, and Chase didn't say that either.

Isn't it amazing how 5 years can improve one's memories.
 
  • #898
Yes, I am wondering the same thing about the 'touch' DNA. If Joey shook hands with Chase, and then left Chase's trace DNA on the steering wheel, what about the trace DNA of the person who drove it to the border?

Wouldn't something that 'fragile' have been disrupted by the last driver of the Trooper?

Hi Katy,

So how is that going to work for the defense? They want the jury to believe it was just benign DNA transfer of CMs found in the Trooper.. Okay. Hmmm but then what?

But then what about the trace DNA found in the graves supposedly belonging to 3 males, and one female?

They cant argue one is simply benign DNA of CMs in the victims Trooper, then switch gears totally, by wanting the jury to then believe the trace DNA found in the graves points to the killers.

How do you think the defense will rectify these two totally opposite defense positions? Tia

Imo
 
  • #899
Around 49:00 mark of Part 1 video, Maline asks SB if she recalls telling Cathy/Kathy Sanchez at that time (around Feb. 16, 2010) she didn't believe the family was coming back, also telling Sanchez she (SB) was going to wash the futon covers. Who was Cathy/Kathy Sanchez?

According Det. Smith's testimony from Day 14 Part 1 (Approx. 25:00 mark), Cathy Sanchez is a friend of Summer's mother Blanche. I guess she (CS) helped Susan and Blanche clean the Fallbrook house. Smith interviewed her in 2014 and she informed him that she had found what she believed to be the futon cover, at the McStay's.

MOO
 
  • #900
Also interesting to note that back in 2014 after hours of being grilled about her 3 hours of calls to Chase the evening of Feb 4th, Cathy never mentioned that she used to phone Chase in the clubhouse or that he was in the clubhouse, or the reception difficulties, and Chase didn't say that either.

Isn't it amazing how 5 years can improve one's memories.

Yeah - I don't take that stuff seriously unless Chase will testify to it

In her own natural language she appears to be insisting she was with chase and made no calls

I think you are right that she is simply confused as to what day it was because clearly she did make those calls so he wasn't with her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
1,083
Total visitors
1,243

Forum statistics

Threads
632,398
Messages
18,625,902
Members
243,135
Latest member
AgentMom
Back
Top