CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #15

[missy1974]

Missy1974..I edited my post (I think after you quoted it apparently) but my concern was with the last statement that Perlin made...

The rebuttal comes from established science that can show why the proffered DNA transfer is not likely, given the facts of the case and DNA science.

He's saying that DNA transfer is not likely, yet he's going to be testifying for the defense, and I would assume he's going to concur with Ryan on the alleged transfer of Merritt's DNA. I just think it's totally hypocritical. But then, most defense experts and defense attorneys don't really play by the rules IMHO.

It does say "given the facts of the case" after that.... and I think it really does come down to individual cases and the known facts surrounding it.

Transfer DNA is a real thing, I think it's been talked about more in recent years because detecting DNA keeps getting better and better, and very little DNA can yield a result.

I have not listened to Ryan's testimony about the transfer DNA yet (I got about half way yesterday and just haven't had the time to sit and listen to it well today), but I did hear the State witness, Jone's, talk about it and he explained it in a super easy, very understandable way and he could not discount it in this case. The one thing that he said that has stood out to me was he can only tell if DNA is present, not the mode of how it got there.

 

[missy1974]

Jimmy Philip Mettias #269572 - Attorney Search

ohhh I missed this earlier... wow! And people fault Merritt for not wanting this guy as his lawyer?

 

[MrsPC]

It does say "given the facts of the case" after that.... and I think it really does come down to individual cases and the known facts surrounding it.

Transfer DNA is a real thing, I think it's been talked about more in recent years because detecting DNA keeps getting better and better, and very little DNA can yield a result.

I have not listened to Ryan's testimony about the transfer DNA yet (I got about half way yesterday and just haven't had the time to sit and listen to it well today), but I did hear the State witness, Jone's, talk about it and he explained it in a super easy, very understandable way and he could not discount it in this case. The one thing that he said that has stood out to me was he can only tell if DNA is present, not the mode of how it got there.

I've been reading alot recently about transfer DNA and it's obviously something to be considered....but the majority of criminal cases are not just based on 1 piece of evidence or one DNA match/conclusion. It's the totality of evidence/all circumstances combined - that prove guilt or innocence. Considering all the other evidence in this case *along with* Merritt's DNA in the trooper - I think the picture is clear.

 

[Karinna]

I've been reading alot recently about transfer DNA and it's obviously something to be considered....but the majority of criminal cases are not just based on 1 piece of evidence or one DNA match/conclusion. It's the totality of evidence/all circumstances combined - that prove guilt or innocence. Considering all the other evidence in this case *along with* Merritt's DNA in the trooper - I think the picture is clear.

Agree, it's always the totality of all the evidence that has to be considered in determining guilt or not. And in this case, all roads lead back to CM, IMO.

 

[KALI]

I give all of you sleuthers a tremendous amount of Kudos.
You all have hung in there even with a nearly complete media blackout.
This case hurts me to my very soul.
What was done to this entire family is really beyond heartbreaking.

From testimony thus far, I feel confident that law enforcement arrested the killer.
I pray that the jurors come to the same conclusion.

 

[Meemaw12]

Ya know this is just the craziest thing. Imagine this.

CM says he rode in the Trooper but not an ounce, zip, nada , zilch, NONE of his DNA is on the passenger side. NONE. No testimony from either side that there is a speck of his damn DNA on any part of the passenger seat, floor, headrest. NOTHING! NONE!!!

But on the drivers side where he said he has NEVER been, through touch DNA from a luncheon there is NO proof ever happened there is his DNA in several places.

Imagine that!!!

Chase Merritt is the unluckiest that I have ever read about. Poor guy can't catch a break. And it freakin happened at the very same time that he stole checks and money from a missing family that was found buried in the desert about 6 miles from where he lived.

Amazing bad luck!!!

I hope that SOB rots in hell for what he did to that family. Uggg makes me sick to my stomach.

So hope the jury gets it right convicts him and sentences him to death. He IMO doesn't deserve to live.

IMO, JMO, MOO

 

[Cricket28]

From the above article:
The issue over Merritt’s defense counsel has been an ongoing issue since Merritt’s arrest in November 2014. In January 2015, Merritt’s first attorney, Robert Ponce, was dismissed from the case after Merritt insisted he represent himself. Defense attorney David Call and private investigator David Farrell were subsequently appointed to advise Merritt.

But it didn’t last long. In May 2015, Merritt retained Mettias and David Askander to represent him. Mettias brought aboard Victorville attorneys Sharon Brunner and Jim Terrell to assist, then Rajan Maline after Terrell left the defense team.

Mettias, Askander, Brunner and Maline represented Merritt until last week.
..............................................................................................
CM has ditched six attorneys, not including himself.
Ponce, Call, Mettias, Askandar, Brunner, and Terrel. I wonder why? Did they want him to cop a plea for a lesser sentence? What did he see in Maline to want to keep him on board even though he wasn't death penalty qualified? By all accounts the state is footing the bill. There must be a set fee for defense attorneys being paid by the state. I would assume it is not as much as being paid in the private sector? Anyone know?

The Sentinel: Allegations of irregularities in awarding of $40 million indigent defense contract - InlandPolitics.com

Unfortunately the article at the link above won't answer your question citygirl, but it's an interesting read. Especially since we are very familiar with 2 of the players.

In response to the September 26 bid solicitation, six law firms submitted bid proposals for the work, including Earl Carter’s firm, under the name Inland Defenders; Burdick under the name Contract Defenders; Greenline Partners, headed by attorneys Daniel Greenberg and Raj Maline; Robert Ponce; the law firm of Brown, White and Newhouse; and the law firm of Skipper, Singer & Associates.

 

[mrjitty]

Yes, sadly the McStay home should of been treated as a potential crime scene much sooner, but it is what it is i guess.
But aside from that the State had enough to take it to Trial with some good evidence anyway.

Of course the police don't have the power to designate your home a crime scene and restrict all access based on mere hunches.

The constitution and the judicial branch prevent such executive action for good reason

 

[mrjitty]

I've been reading alot recently about transfer DNA and it's obviously something to be considered....but the majority of criminal cases are not just based on 1 piece of evidence or one DNA match/conclusion. It's the totality of evidence/all circumstances combined - that prove guilt or innocence. Considering all the other evidence in this case *along with* Merritt's DNA in the trooper - I think the picture is clear.

Yes.

This is why its the intepretation of the DNA evidence in the overall circumstantial web that is key rather than speculating it away in isolation.

In effect, this is the same as if Chase's DNA were found in the graves - defence would still be arguing transfer.

This is what the defence ALWAYS argue along with contamination.

There is no evidence Chase ever road in the passenger side of the trooper unless he testifies IMO

 

[smr]

What did he see in Maline to want to keep him on board even though he wasn't death penalty qualified?

To be honest, shortly after this trial started, when I read the article about Chase retaining Maline, I was the least surprised. If I were in his position (whether rightly or wrongly accused), I would be very picky about my attorneys, too; a good attorney would be a godsend. I suppose in his earlier work Maline earned his trust.

 

[mrjitty]

I'm not sure it would be, they allowed Mike to testify about talking to Joey.

The witness is allowed to talk about conversations they had - goes to direct knowledge and is not hearsay.

However you are not allowed to use witness to prove the truth of the content of a statement made by the 3rd party

So "did you have a conversation about Chase?" - this is OK because the witness participated in the conversation
"did you believe Summer disliked Chase?" - this is OK - goes to witnesses own belief
"did Summer tell you she disliked Chase?" this is hearsay if the point is to prove summer did not like Chase

A very good example came up in Sequida's testimony. He was allowed to testify that the previous workshop warned him about Chase because it was a conversation he was one party to, and goes to his own state of mind. He was not allowed to testify to the content of the warning, as that would be about proving Chase was a thief/dishonest (or whatever the previous workshop believed about him).

 

[mrjitty]

I probably missed it, but did they find those 76 checks in CM’s possession?

This is something I don't like about criminal trials where the defence version is allowed to exist in the murk between two possibilities, even though the defence must know which version is correct.

e.g. if Chase was allowed to print cheques and alternative accounting is a thing, then the defence should be required to admit Chase had the cheques and produce them

As it is, I think the defence is seeking to float to contradictory versions at the same time, yet the defendant has never said he had the 76 blanks, nor that he created/printed/deleted cheques legitimately.

 

[Tortoise]

Ya know this is just the craziest thing. Imagine this.

CM says he rode in the Trooper but not an ounce, zip, nada , zilch, NONE of his DNA is on the passenger side. NONE. No testimony from either side that there is a speck of his damn DNA on any part of the passenger seat, floor, headrest. NOTHING! NONE!!!

But on the drivers side where he said he has NEVER been, through touch DNA from a luncheon there is NO proof ever happened there is his DNA in several places.

Imagine that!!!

Chase Merritt is the unluckiest that I have ever read about. Poor guy can't catch a break. And it freakin happened at the very same time that he stole checks and money from a missing family that was found buried in the desert about 6 miles from where he lived.

Amazing bad luck!!!

I hope that SOB rots in hell for what he did to that family. Uggg makes me sick to my stomach.

So hope the jury gets it right convicts him and sentences him to death. He IMO doesn't deserve to live.

IMO, JMO, MOO

I think I heard Suzanna Ryan saying that his DNA could be detected in the mixture on the passenger door that Donald Jones said was too complicated to analyze. Understanding DNA is not my strong point and I'd have to listen again to get what she said precisely but I think DJ said there were 4 contributors which would make it too complicated to get a reliable result and SR thinks there were only 3 and he should have got a result.

That's what she got from looking at his report/notes not from analyzing the LE swab herself. I do wonder why McGee didn't put that to DJ during his cross-examination because I believe she was in court during his testimony.

 

[Karinna]

Of course the police don't have the power to designate your home a crime scene and restrict all access based on mere hunches.

The constitution and the judicial branch prevent such executive action for good reason

But the McStay family weren't in the home and they had been missing for almost 2 weeks. But yeah if LE didn't suspect a crime had happened there of course they wouldn't treat the home as a crime scene. That is why i said it's a shame they weren't aware at that time what had happened, and treated it as such.
(quote)
In the police academy, officers are taught that once they arrive on scene, they “own” that scene. The officer will be held accountable and responsible for anything good or bad that happens at that scene. If they decide to string yellow police line tape up, rest assured there is a good reason.
Remember, police tape is meant to protect the crime scene, officers - and you

 

[Tortoise]

If Summer's bra didn't yield Summer's DNA as the wearer of the garment then I'm not going to believe a degraded trace of stranger's touch DNA survived in the ground for 3 or 4 years and was still detectable after 8 years.

From what I understand there are no trials that show touch DNA can last anywhere like that length of time.

I'm all for explaining how touch and transfer DNA can get on an item. What I am opposed to is putting an expert on who is not really assisting the court and has the potential to confuse a jury and introduce doubt that isn't yet scientifically proven.

She seems (to me) to be potentially quite a dangerous witness to have testifying in ANY criminal case - it's great to have a technology that can produce more sensitive results but in a field where it hasn't been proven how long DNA can survive and with the date that DNA got there being an unknown factor, her opinion is not really fit to be put in front of a jury IMO, if it means that even one person might not properly understand the implications. Jurors aren't experts and so it comes down to the skill of the attorneys to make sure they don't go away fooled or blinded by smoke and mirrors and a pretty face.

JMO

 

[Karinna]

If Summer's bra didn't yield Summer's DNA as the wearer of the garment then I'm not going to believe a degraded trace of stranger's touch DNA survived in the ground for 3 or 4 years and was still detectable after 8 years.

From what I understand there are no trials that show touch DNA can last anywhere like that length of time.

I'm all for explaining how touch and transfer DNA can get on an item. What I am opposed to is putting an expert on who is not really assisting the court and has the potential to confuse a jury and introduce doubt that isn't yet scientifically proven.

She seems (to me) to be potentially quite a dangerous witness to have testifying in ANY criminal case - it's great to have a technology that can produce more sensitive results but in a field where it hasn't been proven how long DNA can survive and with the date that DNA got there being an unknown factor, her opinion is not really fit to be put in front of a jury IMO, if it means that even one person might not properly understand the implications. Jurors aren't experts and so it comes down to the skill of the attorneys to make sure they don't go away fooled or blinded by smoke and mirrors and a pretty face.

JMO

I agree Tortoise, and hopefully the PT will clear some of that up for the jury when they resume their cross/rebuttal on Monday.

 

[Tortoise]

But the McStay family weren't in the home and they had been missing for almost 2 weeks. But yeah if LE didn't suspect a crime had happened there of course they wouldn't treat the home as a crime scene. That is why i said it's a shame they weren't aware at that time what had happened, and treated it as such.
(quote)
In the police academy, officers are taught that once they arrive on scene, they “own” that scene. The officer will be held accountable and responsible for anything good or bad that happens at that scene. If they decide to string yellow police line tape up, rest assured there is a good reason.
Remember, police tape is meant to protect the crime scene, officers - and you

I really don't know what went wrong in this case.

LE knew -

from McGyver that Summer was really upset having CM in her home and he noted the tension and CM being there twice that week.
from Metro that there were problems with CM that he never reported himself on Feb 17th
from Metro that they held onto the cheques because the signatures didn't look right, not because of a problem with their bank account
from CM that he'd noted the partway opened window but only on his second visit after Mike asked him to look
the condition of the window was different when Mike went there - it appeared closed but not locked
the blinds were broken
CM said he went in the house with Mike but his only proof was Mike's wife telling a neighbor afterwards that she used the bathroom and he didn' know the kids had played upstairs
CM apologized for the unflushed toilet which could mean he'd left it unflushed
CM said he wouldn't go in the window when he went there alone even though there were grounds to
from Joey's phone records that CM was the last person Joey called, was the last person to see Joey, knew he was at his desk later, and then they all vanished and phone activity ceased at the same time a cheque to CM was created on Joey's computer
from CM that he'd used Joey's credit card to purchase Joey a new accounting software after Joey was missing
from Joey's bank records the cheques to CM around the 4th weren't in line with Joey's recent payments to CM
Joey emailed CM telling him he owed him about $43K which CM had not pointed out to them
CM was a criminal
Mike told them his last conversation with Joey he was frantic because money was missing from his account and the only cheque Joey had not written himself that came out on 2nd was one to CM
the stroller was in the garage
cushions were stripped of their covers
CM had spoken of them all in the past tense not in response to questions asked in the past tense
CM told them about heart problems which potentially showed consciousness of physical exertion involved in killing and then moving and burying the bodies
CM had no memory of the 8th and tried to curtail the call after Cathy told him she was out
CM had an injured hand
CM showed classic signs of diversion from questions in his answers
CM hesitated before saying he had been in the Trooper


I think the detectives had more than enough probable cause to treat the house as a crime scene, investigate CM and would have found the bodies sooner with CM's phone records.

JMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

If Summer's bra didn't yield Summer's DNA as the wearer of the garment then I'm not going to believe a degraded trace of stranger's touch DNA survived in the ground for 3 or 4 years and was still detectable after 8 years.

From what I understand there are no trials that show touch DNA can last anywhere like that length of time.

I'm all for explaining how touch and transfer DNA can get on an item. What I am opposed to is putting an expert on who is not really assisting the court and has the potential to confuse a jury and introduce doubt that isn't yet scientifically proven.

She seems (to me) to be potentially quite a dangerous witness to have testifying in ANY criminal case - it's great to have a technology that can produce more sensitive results but in a field where it hasn't been proven how long DNA can survive and with the date that DNA got there being an unknown factor, her opinion is not really fit to be put in front of a jury IMO, if it means that even one person might not properly understand the implications. Jurors aren't experts and so it comes down to the skill of the attorneys to make sure they don't go away fooled or blinded by smoke and mirrors and a pretty face.

JMO

Did she say why she didn't test the murder weapon?

I would have thought that would be the first thing they wanted to test?

Imo

 

[mrjitty]

I really don't know what went wrong in this case.

LE knew -

from McGyver that Summer was really upset having CM in her home and he noted the tension and CM being there twice that week.
from Metro that there were problems with CM that he never reported himself on Feb 17th
from Metro that they held onto the cheques because the signatures didn't look right, not because of a problem with their bank account
from CM that he'd noted the partway opened window but only on his second visit after Mike asked him to look
the condition of the window was different when Mike went there - it appeared closed but not locked
the blinds were broken
CM said he went in the house with Mike but his only proof was Mike's wife telling a neighbor afterwards that she used the bathroom and he didn' know the kids had played upstairs
CM apologized for the unflushed toilet which could mean he'd left it unflushed
CM said he wouldn't go in the window when he went there alone even though there were grounds to
from Joey's phone records that CM was the last person Joey called, was the last person to see Joey, knew he was at his desk later, and then they all vanished and phone activity ceased at the same time a cheque to CM was created on Joey's computer
from CM that he'd used Joey's credit card to purchase Joey a new accounting software after Joey was missing
from Joey's bank records the cheques to CM around the 4th weren't in line with Joey's recent payments to CM
Joey emailed CM telling him he owed him about $43K which CM had not pointed out to them
CM was a criminal
Mike told them his last conversation with Joey he was frantic because money was missing from his account and the only cheque Joey had not written himself that came out on 2nd was one to CM
the stroller was in the garage
cushions were stripped of their covers
CM had spoken of them all in the past tense not in response to questions asked in the past tense
CM told them about heart problems which potentially showed consciousness of physical exertion involved in killing and then moving and burying the bodies
CM had no memory of the 8th and tried to curtail the call after Cathy told him she was out
CM had an injured hand
CM showed classic signs of diversion from questions in his answers
CM hesitated before saying he had been in the Trooper


I think the detectives had more than enough probable cause to treat the house as a crime scene, investigate CM and would have found the bodies sooner with CM's phone records.

JMO

Isn't this pretty much what happened though? They built up probable cause over time for a forensic examination of the house?

IMO its clear at the outset they had no basis to enter the house. Then as time passed they were allowed the welfare check, but that showed nothing to get them further.

I've always suspected two things about the lack of urgency

1. Dugal was in no hurry to catch a quadruple homicide and was thus quite happy with the idea the family had gone on the run.

2. I suspect the point of Mike was he would see if he could find probable cause.

In the end this case always comes back to how well the crime scene was cleaned. e.g, if the investigators had spotted the potential blood splatter on the table, everything is so different.

 

[citygirl]

The Sentinel: Allegations of irregularities in awarding of $40 million indigent defense contract - InlandPolitics.com

Unfortunately the article at the link above won't answer your question citygirl, but it's an interesting read. Especially since we are very familiar with 2 of the players.

In response to the September 26 bid solicitation, six law firms submitted bid proposals for the work, including Earl Carter’s firm, under the name Inland Defenders; Burdick under the name Contract Defenders; Greenline Partners, headed by attorneys Daniel Greenberg and Raj Maline; Robert Ponce; the law firm of Brown, White and Newhouse; and the law firm of Skipper, Singer & Associates.

Thank you! Very interesting read. Politics, Pay to Play, Plead Deals.