Found Deceased CO - Gannon Stauch, 11, Colorado Springs, El Paso County, 27 Jan 2020 *Arrest* #49

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #381
Clearly, nobody wants any defendant including LS to sit for trial when they are in a state that prevents them from participating and/or understanding the proceedings. That would be another travesty of justice, and why the court has provisions for this to halt all proceedings until the defendant's mental health improves or restored.

However, Sept 2020, the state hospital evaluated LS and therefore the court ruled LS competent to stand trial. But LS asked for a second helping-- so we wait.

Specific to this defendant, LS, it infuriates me to know that she's sitting in her zone, most likely taking self-credit, feeling empowered with each passing day, that justice for Gannon is delayed.

Earlier, LS wrote to the judge and told him she was being ignored by her lawyers. And LS showed them! She's like the wizard behind the curtain. I just wish somebody would tell her she's not in Kansas. I want the message inside her peanut butter.

While I obviously don't know what the evaluators at Pueblo saw, and competency to proceed usually isn't a very high bar to clear, her letter to the judge hardly speaks to her competency IMO! (And not for reasons LS might imagine!)

While we all want justice, it's only been 9 months since the crime. The fact the trial hasn't yet started doesn't seem especially slow to me, especially given COVID issues.

Maybe CO usually has more of a rocket docket though.

JMO
 
  • #382
While I obviously don't know what the evaluators at Pueblo saw, and competency to proceed usually isn't a very high bar to clear, her letter to the judge hardly speaks to her competency IMO! (And not for reasons LS might imagine!)

While we all want justice, it's only been 9 months since the crime. The fact the trial hasn't yet started doesn't seem especially slow to me, especially given COVID issues.

Maybe CO usually has more of a rocket docket though.

JMO
Covid excluded, my experience with Colorado is definitely rocket docket (i.e., Watts and Berreth cases)!
 
  • #383
Surely what we want is firm justice not swift justice?
 
  • #384
  • #385
. . . and, this a.m.'s goodies.

donutsPinkBackground.jpg
 
  • #386
Update on the health of the El Paso County Jail

Lance Benzel[URL='https://twitter.com/lancebenzel']@lancebenzel[/URL]

BREAKING: COVID-19 Outbreak at El Paso County jail has swelled w/ 72 inmates testing positive, and more expected to test positive as jail moves to test all inmates and staff in facility, El Paso County Sheriff's Office confirms.

2:33 PM · Oct 29, 2020

Replying to
@lancebenzel
"The threat of further infection will continue to increase over the next several weeks," sheriff's statement warns. So far, no inmates have required hospitalization. All being treated by jail medical contractors.
@csgazette

2:34 PM · Oct 29, 2020

Replying to
@lancebenzel
Today's jail population was 1,190, according to El Paso County booking data.

2:38 PM · Oct 29, 2020·
 
  • #387
Update on the health of the El Paso County Jail

Lance Benzel@lancebenzel

BREAKING: COVID-19 Outbreak at El Paso County jail has swelled w/ 72 inmates testing positive, and more expected to test positive as jail moves to test all inmates and staff in facility, El Paso County Sheriff's Office confirms.

2:33 PM · Oct 29, 2020

Replying to
@lancebenzel
"The threat of further infection will continue to increase over the next several weeks," sheriff's statement warns. So far, no inmates have required hospitalization. All being treated by jail medical contractors.
@csgazette

2:34 PM · Oct 29, 2020

Replying to
@lancebenzel
Today's jail population was 1,190, according to El Paso County booking data.

2:38 PM · Oct 29, 2020·

Well, unless I had a "space suit" I surely wouldn't want to be about to start a competency eval at that jail!
JMO
 
  • #388
Well, unless I had a "space suit" I surely wouldn't want to be about to start a competency eval at that jail!
JMO
A lawyer was sanctioned by the court yesterday for refusing to show up for court -- citing his client incarcerated at the EPC high-risk COVID jail.
 
  • #389
A lawyer was sanctioned by the court yesterday for refusing to show up for court -- citing his client incarcerated at the EPC high-risk COVID jail.

Frazee's old lawyer, to be exact. And honestly, don't blame him.
 
  • #390
Good Evening.

pizzaAndBeverages_1.jpg
 
  • #391
New documents on judicial site
 
  • #392
  • #393
for this one:

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/04th_Judicial_District/El_Paso/Stauch/D22 Motion to Extend Deadline for 2nd Competency Evaluation(1).pdf

I pulled these points out of D22 Motion

10/30/20: D21 Response to People's Motion regarding the use of Video & Audio recording during a competency evaluation. D22 Motion to extend deadline to complete 2nd competency evaluation & to continue the review hearing on 11/12/20 due to COVID outbreak at the El Paso County jail. Dr. Grimmett was scheduled to a in-person competency eval of Stauch on 10/31/20, but on 10/29/20 Dr. Grimmett informed defense counsel that the jail has cancelled all in-person visitation until at least 11/30/20. Stauch is requesting an extension of time to complete 2nd competency eval. The defense requests that a review hearing be rescheduled after 12/14/20 to allow Dr. Grimmett adequate time to complete her eval.
 
  • #394
https://www.courts.state.co.us/user...e Use of Video and Audio during Comp Eval.pdf

Defense responded (D21) to Peoples motion re. use of video/audio during competency eval...

Defense objects to the use of audio/video during eval because it's not authorized by statute.

OK, so why didn't you object when the first eval ordered?

This circular argument by both sides continues to be a waste of the Court's time!

MOO
 
  • #395
Happy Halloween!

halloweenBatDonuts.jpg halloweenDonuts.jpg coffeeTeaExpresso.jpg
 
  • #396
  • #397
I looked up to see if they had a new court date since the defense wants more time. Only her divorce is so far listed with an added court date for it.

Date Len Name Hearing Type Case # Location Division
3/29/21
11:00 AM 1Hr STAUCH, LETECIA Status Conference D212020DR30309 El Paso County DIV 16-ROOM S370 (South Tower)

4/30/21
8:45 AM 2Hr STAUCH, LETECIA Permanent Orders Hearing D212020DR30309 El Paso County DIV 16-ROOM S370 (South Tower)

link: Seventh Judicial District » Docket Search
 
  • #398
Deleted by me. Accidental double post.
 
  • #399
https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/04th_Judicial_District/El_Paso/Stauch/D21 Response to Peoples Motion Re Use of Video and Audio during Comp Eval.pdf

Defense responded (D21) to Peoples motion re. use of video/audio during competency eval...

Defense objects to the use of audio/video during eval because it's not authorized by statute.

OK, so why didn't you object when the first eval ordered?

This circular argument by both sides continues to be a waste of the Court's time!

MOO

I suppose it's possible the PDs haven't ever had a client undergo a competency eval that a DA wanted recorded. Obviously I don't know but I suspect that was an unusual request. Or maybe they haven't had one since the new statute re: recording sanity and diminished responsibility evals was enacted. Not that those are legitimate excuses but they could be the reasons for no initial objection. I say that partly because the judge ordered the first recording under the January 2017 (inapplicable) statute as the DA apparently had suggested applied. So maybe nobody is very familiar with the 3+ year old law. Otherwise it's still a mystery to me why they didn't object.

I don't think though that it's really fair (from a layperson's perspective) to say since the PDs initially screwed up (at least screwed up IMO) then they can't object. Their client's best interests and legal rights still have to be protected despite any mistakes they may have made.

I have no idea how the judge will rule. I did like the bluntness of one part of the defense's response. That the competency eval is not an interview to gather incriminating evidence needed to be said, especially after the state's brief. Along with citing the new statute related to trial matters for the trier of fact/jury to consider (insanity/diminished responsibility) every other statute cited by the state in its brief to justify taping seemed to be related to interrogations to gather evidence. That's not what a pre-trial competency eval is for.
JMO
 
  • #400
Was the autopsy report ever issued? Would LS be privy to it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
127
Guests online
3,126
Total visitors
3,253

Forum statistics

Threads
632,567
Messages
18,628,464
Members
243,197
Latest member
DMighty
Back
Top