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

[mrjitty]

Any lawyer in his right mind would advise DK to take the 5th, the only thing that could backfire is if the prosecution extends an immunity offer to DK. If this were to happen then DK could potentially implicate both CM and himself without concern for the consequences.

The gameplay is much more complex than that. You are assuming Chase is innocent and DK is guilty - but even then it creates a great opportunity for DK to fit Chase up, with testimony that the defendant cannot counter.

If on the other hand Chase is guilty and DK innocent - then he could really do massive damage with detailed testimony about his time in Hawaii

If you are McGee/Maline, you cannot assume Chase is innocent and DK guilty.

 

[Force Ten]

Do you really think they will wrap it up by tomorrow's end?

Possibly, unless something else happens, like Dan pops up. Monday at the latest.

 

[Frankie Hellis]

Possibly, unless something else happens, like Dan pops up. Monday at the latest.

I thought they couldn’t be there on Monday.

 

[Force Ten]

I thought they couldn’t be there on Monday.

You are correct.

 

[Texas Red]

You are assuming Chase is innocent and DK is guilty

The scenario I described is with the assumption of guilt regarding only the peripheral crimes associated with this case and without consideration for the murders. I believe enough evidence has been established showing DK being involved in nefarious actions that he most certainly has at least civil exposure as a consequence of these actions. So, with that being said there is no way he would testify without immunity and I believe that the PT does not have the option of extending civil immunity.

 

[Force Ten]

IMO they don't even need to call Dan as I think they (defense) achieved what they set out to do. The jury will wonder why he wasn't called but for they know now, he could be deceased.

 

[Frankie Hellis]

You are correct.

Unfortunately. I was hoping I was wrong.

 

[shannon.spike.1]

Do you really think they will wrap it up by tomorrow's end?

I would highly doubt it!

 

[missy1974]

McStay Trial Day 31 Part 1 Susan Blake Called by Defense 03/18/19
If you listen to SB's testimony she states it was a misunderstanding about JM adding more welders along with CM, and denied that the statement was correct. Joey definitely wanted to be rid of Merritt.

It doesn't matter how big and bold the text is, I heard the testimony and that included her looking at her statement transcript with det. Hanke where she said otherwise, and that statement was very early on. Her opinion or statements may have changed over the years, however it does not change what she said to Hanke imo.

 

[missy1974]

Which was before Chase stole off Joey. So maybe that was the vision for awhile and Chase just couldn’t help himself.


He is just a con man at the end of the day and Joey wasn’t the first fool to swallow Chases lies.

That very well could be, but Susan did not have direct knowledge of that at the time they disappeared or we would have heard that. Imo

 

[la2cabo]

Yes but he didn’t give Chase cheques to pay off the 3rd parties did he?

Joey paid on his behalf!!

The checks that Merritt did write bounced and bounced and bounced.

 

[la2cabo]

If called I believe DK will take the 5th. For this reason I think it would be a good strategy for the defense to call him because if he does take the 5th in front of the jury it will seal the deal for the defense.

He's a defense witness. Do really expect him to help the prosecution?

BBM: I expect him to have a moral compass and be honest. Is that too much to ask?

 

[la2cabo]

Delete

 

[Texas Red]

BBM: I expect him to have a moral compass and be honest. Is that too much to ask?

I don't think he's being dishonest, he's crafting his answers in a way that will cast CM in the best light. This is what expert witnesses do, it's not nearly as bad as Liscio's testimony for the prosecution, a reflection, lol, yeah right.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I see no logical reason for the state to call DK. They haven't been the one telling the jury DK is the killer. The state is there to present evidence against the accused which they have done exceptionally well. Imo.

The crosses by the state have been masterful of the defense witnesses. Imo

DK had no involvement in the 4 murders, and not one piece of evidence has shown he was involved in the murders. So he has no relevancy in the murder trial against CM.

Imo, the jury is expecting the defense to produce him since they need to support their thus far...very weak claim the wrong man is own trial despite the evidence showing otherwise. So they need to man up, and produce him.

Imo, if he does testify I dont understand why some think he would plead the 5th. For what? He has never been arrested, and charged with anything connected to Joey's business, and it's been many years. He wasn't even civilly sued by any of the McStay family members.

Imo, the defense will not call DK....not just because they already know he's not the killer, but most of all they know it would open the floodgates about Dk telling the jury many more underhanded things DK knows CM did to Joey.

The state shouldn't be the one to call him, but if the defense doesn't produce him, then in closings the state will remind the jury the defense could have called DK. Asking them 'but did you see DK on the witness stand during the entire defense case???'

Imo

 

[Texas Red]

I dont understand why some think he would plead the 5th. For what? He has never been arrested, and charged with anything connected to Joey's business

You've pretty much answered your own question, he's hasn't yet been charged with anything and I imagine he'd like to keep it that way, so, because of this he'd be a fool to testify. What does he have to gain from doing so?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

You've pretty much answered your own question, he's hasn't yet been charged with anything and I imagine he'd like to keep it that way, so, because of this he'd be a fool to testify. What does he have to gain from doing so?

Nah, after this many years he's not going to be. LE has long known about all of DKs transactions after Joey was murdered.

And you must file a civil suit within 2 years of when it occurred. So that ain't happening either.

I'm sure the defense would hope he would plead the 5th, but they know he has no reason to do so after this many years has passed.

Imo the DT wont call him. It's better to talk about him rather than giving him a chance to defend himself, and spill more rotten stinky beans on CM for the jury to hear.

Imo

 

[Chelly]

You've pretty much answered your own question, he's hasn't yet been charged with anything and I imagine he'd like to keep it that way, so, because of this he'd be a fool to testify. What does he have to gain from doing so?

But does he have the option to not testify if he's been subpoenaed?

 

[la2cabo]

The scenario I described is with the assumption of guilt regarding only the peripheral crimes associated with this case and without consideration for the murders. I believe enough evidence has been established showing DK being involved in nefarious actions that he most certainly has at least civil exposure as a consequence of these actions. So, with that being said there is no way he would testify without immunity and I believe that the PT does not have the option of extending civil immunity.

Lol. Everybody knows Kavanaugh doesn't have a pot to piss in so I highly doubt he's concerned about exposure to any civil liability. As far as any criminal liability goes I'm sure he knows if there was any evidence against him he would've been charged already.

 

[Tortoise]

They've gone to another 30 minute recess. I just don't get it, they had 2 hours to prepare for Sgt Steers to ask him about the awning in the Mitchley video. Now they're not ready for the next officer.