CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #18

[asyousay]

They obviously knew how long the trial was going to go on for so why get Jury memebers who couldn’t commit fully?

I get it illness or something sudden pops up but cruises and holidays then they would be booked before the trial started and if book when the trial started then you should be told that’ tough luck you have committed to this trial.

 

[Tortoise]

The PT attempting to portray the lower sidelight on the truck as a reflection has done them an insurmountable amount of harm. It makes them appear dishonest and disingenuous to seriously contend that the glow imitating from the video is a reflection. The problem this creates for them is it demonstrates the level of deceit they're capable of. After seeing this any reasonable person must ask themselves how much of the other evidence they've presented is also compromised.

I don't think so. As Imes pointed out the 'light' disappeared for 4 frames and its intensity changed, after the witness already agreed a light would be constant. He now says compression artefacts would make a 'light' disappear and change in intensity, he didn't answer that last week with the same expertise.

However what I think most damages the DT's argument is that they tried to find out if Mike owned the same make and model of truck. Seems like an admission to me, not that lawyers questions are evidence.

April 3rd:

Maline: Ok, but you had a 3500 and you knew that Chase’s truck was a 3500 right? – MM: I did not, I don’t know what his was.

Maline: Did you see the neighbor’s surveillance video that we watched in court here? – MM: I did yes.

Maline: Was that your truck? – MM: It’s not my truck.


JMO

 

[Tortoise]

And I see no one answered my question on the "video guy"
<snipped>

Gregg Stutchman

 

[mrjitty]

I don't think it is that big of a deal it was off the books, not included in the ledger. It was in a side note, which is a reminder, a notation, of monies owed. And sent in an email, memo, right before the murders.
It was not in the ledger because of the long standing, strange turn of events, surrounding the situation. JMO

Right

As I mentioned I think this witness was strong when he was simply explaining how the ledgers worked and broke down Provecho. He was doing a good job of demystifying, and showing everything was regular and this was just how the books worked.

However the "off book" comment was completely disingenuous and he then proceeded to speculate about the $19K+$8.8K = $27,800 debt in a way that is directly opposite to Joey's express intention in the email.

The reason the $27,800 is "off book" is due to the way the two ledgers worked. So for Provecho, the payments to Chase are listed and accounted for in the usual way, and this is correct. As well as this jobs ledger, Joey maintained a basic credit/debit ledger to give his current cash position with Chase. So for example, when Joey paid supplier costs on behalf of Chase these were debits (i.e Chase now owes Joey money). On the other hand, Joey would book the instalment payments as credits. So at the end of the day in respect of a particular job, this running ledger also sums to null. i.e. the amounts paid to Chase and the suppliers, should cancel out the 65% job split owed to. This was basically how Joey floated Chase's operations out of EIP's cashflow.

Provecho does not strictly fit in this ledger - it is an extraordinary item. So yes Joey could have added two items for the Levine and Provecho - but clearly it is also just simpler to keep them in the notes.

And his email makes it clear that the $19K+$8.8K = $27,800 were in fact debit items to be added to the running balance.

Presumably Joey would start to book these into the running ledger when it was time for Chase to pay. We don't know when that would be, but we do know from the Jail House tapes that Chase did owe this to Joey.

As things stood, Joey had taken the entire loss of profit on his side, but also paid out Chase 19K. Again we don't know specifically why it was agreed that Chase would repay all 19K and not some lesser amount (e.g. factoring in fabrication/materials). Point is, its clear on the face of the record that 19K was to be booked against Chase at some point.

Finally it was also completely disingenuous to claim that the amount was only owed if a claim/demand failed. This is wild speculation. We know Joey lost the chargeback already and there is simply no evidence he ever instigated legal proceedings

What holds far more water is the $15,045 which reflects the state of the running balance at a snapshot in time. That should always zero out job by job

But again the point is, even with PM and Saudi coming in - the actual cash payouts to Chase were not going to be anything like in the past

So in the cold light of day, I think this witness perhaps served to highlight Chase's cash issue, if Joey was indeed moving to pay himself back on Provecho / Levine

 

[Niner]

Gregg Stutchman

Thank you!

And I hate to bother you - does he have a "title"?

 

[Tortoise]

Thank you!

And I hate to bother you - does he have a "title"?

Do you mean like Mr.?

Or job title? He's a forensic analyst in video forensics, in this case.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I believe there's a rather large difference between circumstantial evidence and a confession.

You are correct. I've never seen a trial go forward based solely on a confession only. Its as you have stated there is a vast difference in the court system between CE, and a confession alone.

However circumstantial evidence cases have long been recognized,and upheld by our courts all the way up to the USSC... as weighty evidence. Even more so than direct evidence cases since often eye witnesses can be faulty. So we have two types of evidence presented in our trials. 1. CE. 2. DE. Or a combination of both.

The majority of cases tried are CE cases like this one.

So I agree. Confessions alone are not enough to support any conviction nor even enough for an arrest/charge.

Now a confession that lines up will all of the CE facts can be powerful evidence, but a stand alone confession is not, nor is one needed in any CE case.

I've seen many cases on ID where LE did have a confession but nothing else. But they knew they needed CE that would support the confession evidence before the suspect could even be arrested, and charged.

Imo

 

[Longtimenoc]

The juror who recused herself for religious reasons sounds like a big loss for defense. It makes sense to me that this person would be anti-death penalty and would have hung the jury. Even though their is no death penalty anymore the fact that it still is a capital dp case may have still bothered her conscience. Just speculation.

 

[Niner]

Do you mean like Mr.?

Or job title? He's a forensic analyst in video forensics, in this case.

sorry left out the word "job".....

 

[Niner]

The juror who recused herself for religious reasons sounds like a big loss for defense. It makes sense to me that this person would be anti-death penalty and would have hung the jury. Even though their is no death penalty anymore the fact that it still is a capital dp case may have still bothered her conscience. Just speculation.

Ah - you mentioned a "she" - so, does anyone know what gender of the alternates took over? TIA!

 

[asyousay]

The juror who recused herself for religious reasons sounds like a big loss for defense. It makes sense to me that this person would be anti-death penalty and would have hung the jury. Even though their is no death penalty anymore the fact that it still is a capital dp case may have still bothered her conscience. Just speculation.

That makes zero sense though as it’s always been a death penalty case so they wouldn’t of agreed to do the trial if it was to do with that.

 

[Tortoise]

These are the amounts Merritt received for Paul Mitchell and Saudi Arabia. Cheques were all backdated to Feb 4th.

Paul Mitchell - total job $31,500 - Joey received 50%+ deposit $16,000 on Jan 25th and on Feb 1st wrote a cheque $6,350 to Metro, leaving $9,650 in bank.

Feb 5th $4,500 - cheque written out of EIP
Feb 22nd $5,000 - Wire transfer from Paul Mitchell to CM
Total paid to Merritt $9,500

So of a balance of $15,500 due from Paul Mitchell - did they only pay another $5,000 after Jan 25th? Maybe there was another wire court disallowed paid in New York?



Saudi Arabia - total job $61,542 - Joey received 50% deposit $30,733 on Jan 22nd and same date wrote cheque $9,250 to Metro, leaving $21,483 in bank.

Feb 2nd $2495 - cheque written out of EIP - memo deposit
Feb 5th $2350 - ditto - memo lighting install
Feb 8th $6500 - ditto - memo saudi arabia final
Total cheques $11,345
Mar 5th - $13,862 - wire transfer from SA to CM ($16,839 also wired to DK)
Total paid to Merritt $25,207

Did Susan/Dan pay him something for this job also? The memo line of 'saudi arabia final' on Feb 8th cheque (backdated to Feb 4th) is before SA paid the final bal.

Joey's email - notably the witness says money would have immediately become due to Merritt upon Joey receiving the 50% deposit but Joey chose not to issue him any money yet, despite choosing to pay Metro.



MOO

 

[Tortoise]

You are correct. I've never seen a trial go forward based solely on a confession only. Its as you have stated there is a vast difference in the court system between CE, and a confession alone.

However circumstantial evidence cases have long been recognized,and upheld by our courts all the way up to the USSC... as weighty evidence. Even more so than direct evidence cases since often eye witnesses can be faulty. So we have two types of evidence presented in our trials. 1. CE. 2. DE. Or a combination of both.

The majority of cases tried are CE cases like this one.

So I agree. Confessions alone are not enough to support any conviction nor even enough for an arrest/charge.

Now a confession that lines up will all of the CE facts can be powerful evidence, but a stand alone confession is not, nor is one needed in any CE case.

I've seen many cases on ID where LE did have a confession but nothing else. But they knew they needed CE that would support the confession evidence before the suspect could even be arrested, and charged.

Imo

It's a good job there's phone records showing 1 call to Joey all weekend, with two witnesses testifying he said he'd tried to contact Joey all weekend. That's the power of circumstantial evidence - it highlights the lies the defendant told.

 

[la2cabo]

These are the amounts Merritt received for Paul Mitchell and Saudi Arabia. Cheques were all backdated to Feb 4th.

Paul Mitchell - total job $31,500 - Joey received 50%+ deposit $16,000 on Jan 25th and on Feb 1st wrote a cheque $6,350 to Metro, leaving $9,650 in bank.

Feb 5th $4,500 - cheque written out of EIP
Feb 22nd $5,000 - Wire transfer from Paul Mitchell to CM
Total paid to Merritt $9,500

So of a balance of $15,500 due from Paul Mitchell - did they only pay another $5,000 after Jan 25th? Maybe there was another wire court disallowed paid in New York?



Saudi Arabia - total job $61,542 - Joey received 50% deposit $30,733 on Jan 22nd and same date wrote cheque $9,250 to Metro, leaving $21,483 in bank.

Feb 2nd $2495 - cheque written out of EIP - memo deposit
Feb 5th $2350 - ditto - memo lighting install
Feb 8th $6500 - ditto - memo saudi arabia final
Total cheques $11,345
Mar 5th - $13,862 - wire transfer from SA to CM ($16,839 also wired to DK)
Total paid to Merritt $25,207

Did Susan/Dan pay him something for this job also? The memo line of 'saudi arabia final' on Feb 8th cheque (backdated to Feb 4th) is before SA paid the final bal.

Joey's email - notably the witness says money would have immediately become due to Merritt upon Joey receiving the 50% deposit but Joey chose not to issue him any money yet, despite choosing to pay Metro.

View attachment 182046

MOO

...notably the witness says money would have immediately become due to Merritt upon Joey receiving the 50% deposit...

This part made no sense. Why would Joey pay Merritt his full portion upon receipt of the deposit considering the job may not get paid out in full for various reasons? I don't think this part is accurate/true.

 

[Mony Mony]

So you were in the court? What were the "two or three sentences they spoke"?

No. About a week or two ago after testimony had been concluded for the day, the feed was left on while the jurors talked to the judge about their time off requests.

Two female jurors spoke, and one male juror spoke.

The male juror needed a particular day off for a soccer or football tournament or something. I think he said he was the coach.

The female jurors were needing the same day off, I think.

It was a very casual and lighthearted conversation.

 

[Tortoise]

...notably the witness says money would have immediately become due to Merritt upon Joey receiving the 50% deposit...

This part made no sense. Why would Joey pay Merritt his full portion upon receipt of the deposit considering the job may not get paid out in full for various reasons? I don't think this part is accurate/true.

I don't think it's true either - the best witness to this is Joey's actions IMO.

It would need to be fabricated before Merritt could put the lights on. Wonder if it was going to be UV lights.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

That makes zero sense though as it’s always been a death penalty case so they wouldn’t of agreed to do the trial if it was to do with that.

Yes it really makes no sense since they had to agree to consider death if appropriate when selected.

This is a wild guess, and probably wrong.

Could the juror be of Muslim faith? Isn't Ramadan soon, and last for a month or more? Do they have to fast during this time?

Imo

 

[Tortoise]

You're right ocean - that sounds like a more likely reason to me. Ramadan is May 5th to Jun 4th.

 

[asyousay]

Yes it really makes no sense since they had to agree to consider death if appropriate when selected.

This is a wild guess, and probably wrong.

Could the juror be of Muslim faith? Isn't Ramadan soon, and last for a month or more? Do they have to fast during this time?

Imo

This makes a lot more sense as yes they fast for about 15 hours of the day. They don’t eat or drink during daylight hours.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

You're right ocean - that sounds like a more likely reason to me. Ramadan is May 5th to Jun 4th.

Aw, thanks. I thought so, but wasnt sure.