CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #8

[JMarsh]

Unless you had a Felony Warrant for your arrest and didn't want to give LE a roadmap to your home.

LE interviewed Chase at his home when he was interviewed in Feb 2010

 

[katydid23]

Yes. But if Chase knew about DNA so well he could anticipate a "transfer-DNA" defense, he would also know that the amount of DNA he would leave, even the locations, would be uncertain.

The only real certainty he could have that he would leave no DNA is if he was careful, wore surgical gloves and wiped down the car in bleach.

If he had wiped down the car with bleach, that would have gone against the staging. It would have immediately proven the family did not drive there themselves.

 

[Tortoise]

Interesting little argument there outside the presence of the jury. It sounds like after lunch they might be raising in testimony the subjects of Chase's photos of the tyre tracks, the searches re. changing identity and the Alaska border searches.

 

[Tortoise]

RSBM @Tortoise thank you for taking the time to post this.

It's telling to me that the pros feels the need to resort to stunts like these. We saw the same thing with Dr. Rudin. Graphs and charts are great evidence but what are they worth without a WRITTEN conclusion by an expert supported by procedure and facts?

When a physician consults a specialist for their patient, the specialist will usually order his own diagnostics in order to assess the patient. When the specialist receives the reports of those diagnostic tests, assessments, procedures, etc., he doesn't just send those reports back to the consulting physician to figure out for himself, regardless of whether the consulting physician is capable of that or not. The specialist will review all of the data and come up with his conclusion. He will then sometimes in person or via phone discuss with the consulting physician, but he will ALWAYS dictate a written report of what he did to assess the patient as a specialist in that particular practice and then offer his conclusions and often recommendations for that client.

One would also expect, when the pros or defense hires an expert, that once the expert reviews the evidence, the expert would then offer a written summary of his conclusions with an explanation of how he came to his conclusions. I do realize that things are likely not as rigid as they are in the medical profession. However imo why hire an expert if they aren't going to formally document their expert opinion, in writing? I can think of one reason... to leave the door open for alternate interpretation down the line. Perhaps this is a common tactic in trials but I was expecting better from this prosecution to be honest. We were told years ago that the pros have a solid case against Merritt, and that they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. So why so shady?

It's hardly an expert "opinion" that money was paid into an account and cash withdrawals were made where they were. Charts are documentary evidence. No opinion necessary - it can't be argued.

Why would you name presenting financial information a stunt?

JMO

 

[Force Ten]

147 K ==amount cash paid to Chase according to FA

2600 = supply purchases for business

2% of his income was used for business purchases


That ^^^ is what FA found

Defense says that he didn't take into account all of the checks Chase paid out for supplies

[ I wonder how much those supply checks totaled]
[ I am sure the defense will tell us]

defense now accusing the state of purposely hiding checks from the FA

defense asking about the amount of cash withdrawals form casinos= percentage wise

defense says cash withdrawals 24k in Feb, 6% withdrawn in casinos

Aug 46% of total -- 3k withdrawn at a casino


June 20% of cash withdrawn was at a casino

[ these^^^ are the numbers the defense is admitting to and arguing for, the FA says it is higher]

[ seem to make him a heavy gambler]


defense Q ; how many days per month is money taken out at a casino? is this correct?

A ; it looks correct

D= in Jan 3 days of casino withdrawlas===for 1300 bucks [ in 9 days only total]

feb== 536, 288, 488, total

mar==488 404, 492

apr 304, 408,, 104, 712,

may, 84, 1089, 504,

june 404,
july 104, 272, 103,

defense asked===how much of that money was NOT used to gamble. How much did he walk out with?


[that seems like a dumb question. Nobody goes to the casino to get cash to go pay rent with. Nobody uses the ATM at the casino so they can go buy business supplies, imo]

Is someone going to go to San Manuel Casino just to get some cash from the ATM to pay for sheet metal? I doubt it.

Yes I'm sure a lot of the monies was spent at the buffet lol :::eye roll:::

 

[JMarsh]

RSBM @Tortoise thank you for taking the time to post this.

It's telling to me that the pros feels the need to resort to stunts like these. We saw the same thing with Dr. Rudin. Graphs and charts are great evidence but what are they worth without a WRITTEN conclusion by an expert supported by procedure and facts?

When a physician consults a specialist for their patient, the specialist will usually order his own diagnostics in order to assess the patient. When the specialist receives the reports of those diagnostic tests, assessments, procedures, etc., he doesn't just send those reports back to the consulting physician to figure out for himself, regardless of whether the consulting physician is capable of that or not. The specialist will review all of the data and come up with his conclusion. He will then sometimes in person or via phone discuss with the consulting physician, but he will ALWAYS dictate a written report of what he did to assess the patient as a specialist in that particular practice and then offer his conclusions and often recommendations for that client.

One would also expect, when the pros or defense hires an expert, that once the expert reviews the evidence, the expert would then offer a written summary of his conclusions with an explanation of how he came to his conclusions. I do realize that things are likely not as rigid as they are in the medical profession. However imo why hire an expert if they aren't going to formally document their expert opinion, in writing? I can think of one reason... to leave the door open for alternate interpretation down the line. Perhaps this is a common tactic in trials but I was expecting better from this prosecution to be honest. We were told years ago that the pros have a solid case against Merritt, and that they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. So why so shady?

This is not the only case I've followed where reports from expert witnesses have been absent. And I was surprised when Immes stated there was no legal requirement for reports. How is the defense or the DA supposed to adequately respond to an expert's interpretation if they don't know the reasoning behind it?

 

[katydid23]

Interesting little argument there outside the presence of the jury. It sounds like after lunch they might be raising in testimony the subjects of Chase's photos of the tyre tracks, the searches re. changing identity and the Alaska border searches.

Yep. They mentioned those exact subjects.

 

[Longtimenoc]

I don't see that there are so much Merritt "defenders" , there are just people analyzing the evidence and coming to different conclusions. There doesn't need to be an us vs. them mentality. None of us know with absolute certainty what happened because we weren't there. Talking ABOUT people is actually not respecting everyone's right to have their own opinion. And you do seem to do this a lot.

Right. You have to have been there to be absolutely certain. So if no one was there he is not guilty.

 

[katydid23]

Bottom line for me, from what he heard today so far----Gambling was a huge issue for Chase


We now know that he withdrew about 26k from casino ATMs. No body goes to a casino ATM to get cash for business supplies or their rent.

Also, in my experience, people go to the casino with cash in hand. They then go to the ATMS when they run out of cash. Chase often used the ATM multiple times in one casino visit.

So if he got 26k from those ATM visits, I am thinking he lost much more than that because he also went to the casino with cash first. His gambling losses could be double that amount. JMO

 

[Tortoise]

This is not the only case I've followed where reports from expert witnesses have been absent. And I was surprised when Immes stated there was no legal requirement for reports. How is the defense or the DA supposed to adequately respond to an expert's interpretation if they don't know the reasoning behind it?

There was no interpretation.

He never opined that Chase spent that money on gambling or in the casino.

That will be for the jury to decide, in the knowledge that he withdrew the cash from the ATM in the casino.

 

[katydid23]

This is not the only case I've followed where reports from expert witnesses have been absent. And I was surprised when Immes stated there was no legal requirement for reports. How is the defense or the DA supposed to adequately respond to an expert's interpretation if they don't know the reasoning behind it?

The Forensic Accountant was pretty much just totaling up figures from the banking records. What 'interpretation' would they put in a report?

 

[cobalt sky]

It's hardly an expert "opinion" that money was paid into an account and cash withdrawals were made where they were. Charts are documentary evidence. No opinion necessary - it can't be argued.

Why would you name presenting financial information a stunt?

JMO

Mr. Weitzman was consulted for his expertise in forensic accounting, correct? Mr. Weitzman is the one who created the graphs and charts, correct? Therefore Mr. Weitzman at minimum should state in writing where he received the information of which he used to create his charts and graphs, and any conclusions he derived from them if any. That's usually what experts do.

 

[katydid23]

Mr. Weitzman was consulted for his expertise in forensic accounting, correct? Mr. Weitzman is the one who created the graphs and charts, correct? Therefore Mr. Weitzman at minimum should state in writing where he received the information of which he used to create his charts and graphs, and any conclusions he derived from them if any. That's usually what experts do.

His graphs clearly state where the figures come from.

And what conclusions? I didnt hear any interpretations from him. Just figures put into graph form.

 

[cobalt sky]

The Forensic Accountant was pretty much just totaling up figures from the banking records. What 'interpretation' would they put in a report?

If there were no conclusions drawn from the charts and graphs created, he should have documented that in writing.

 

[katydid23]

If there were no conclusions drawn from the charts and graphs created, he should have documented that in writing.

What? Sorry, that makes no sense.

 

[missy1974]

You're right. I listened to Smith again.

It's been mentioned more as well, sorry I wasn't able to give you the links Glad you found it! I think it's one of those things the prosecution should just stop asking about... it's not helping them! JMO

 

[Tortoise]

Mr. Weitzman was consulted for his expertise in forensic accounting, correct? Mr. Weitzman is the one who created the graphs and charts, correct? Therefore Mr. Weitzman at minimum should state in writing where he received the information of which he used to create his charts and graphs, and any conclusions he derived from them if any. That's usually what experts do.

It is just adding up numbers from the bank statements and putting them into different headings to make a graph. He did not draw any conclusions it was just a presentation of financial information much the same as presenting a profit and loss account would be, that does not require opinion, which is why his cross examination was so short.

 

[Force Ten]

Originally, the withdrawals were just labeled as PCA and GPA. The FA did not know what that meant, and where it was being withdrawn. He thought it was a POINT OF PURCHASE withdrawals from a market etc

Since then he found it was from 2 casinos....

66 withdrawals at casinos. But it's not an addiction.

 

[cobalt sky]

What? Sorry, that makes no sense.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. What I meant is, I understand that there were two separate issues going on. Weitzman would have created the graphs and charts. But he would have also analyzed them and possibly come to conclusions based on what he saw. For example, did he conclude that Chase spent a lot of money in Casinos? On groceries? On gas? If so, he should have documented that in a report. Or, if he could not come to any conclusions upon analyzing his graphs and charts, he should have also documented that no conclusions or interpretations could be made.

 

[missy1974]

This article had me literally LOL when I first read it. Joseph had $86k in the bank when they disappeared, they just purchased a home for which they paid $10-15k over asking price(?). The DM is getting this info from a tenant(!!!) who didn't know them or the circumstances of their rental who's breaking federal laws in opening their mail. Even Chase himself posted comments regarding this douche bag.

All this after the family was found brutally murdered. Some shameless people out there.

These are the articles that fueled a ton of speculation in the beginning IMO