The intent of the defense is not elicit the truth. It is to mangle it. To try and elicit a contradiction from LE. There is no sese to what Apo is doing. he is trying to make Loo dance from a six shooter. Dont blame Maui News because Apo's questioning is ridiculous. I cant stand Maui News.
Warning: Vent following--
Thanks, PT. But, I'm not blaming MN because apo's questioning is ridiculous; I'm blaming MN for lousy reporting and writing.
My comment lamented a frustratingly uninformative article, and I'm simply stating that from the report we cannot be sure WHAT was said or done with regard to ANYTHING, because the piece itself is written and organized so poorly--disjointed half-facts, haphazardly strung together. This leads to pointless assumptions, speculation and confusion on the readers' part, --all decidedly unhelpful...but we musn't have clarity! ...And what about MN choosing to say Loo "acknowledged" [that he committed an oversight] --a word loaded with innuendo? What came prior which would justify or explain both Loo and the reporter's thinking? Can we just have an exact quote, please? And Gee I wish I didn't have to guess which document they're for sure talking about--ASSUMED to be the Miranda Warning Document, which you, PT, so thoughtfully provided--because that doc very clearly covers SC's right to an attorney. Yet now we ponder... what is not "explicit" about ONLY This one part of the "MPD warnings and waver form" (which WAS "read aloud" and "each warning" WAS initialed by SC)? We must piece together the mess, always wondering what information is missing.To boot, we are left to figure out what is not "explicit" about "reading aloud"--ONLY failing to be explicit for the read aloud attorney part (s?)
Should we think that maybe Loo speed-mumbled through the attorney parts? The first & second were nice and loud and clear--those initials count--but numbers three and four sounded kind of mffrstashny--oh but then he recovered his clear, explicit Miranda voice for number five and finished well.
...Oh yes, another thing: why twice make ill-placed references to the 10 x 10 audio and video room, and word it as if it might be two different rooms? See? I wrote it clearly. I can see Apo using the room descriptions as emotional manipulation, but MN's word and placement choices are illogical and misleading.
So, yes, we know well what defense is up to--but what we don't know so well is what happened in the courtroom. :moo::moo::moo:
OK, I'm done.
Mpd warnings and waiver form, Miranda:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=76162
http://www.mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/598888/
["That testimony followed Loo's third day of questioning in 2nd Circuit Court. Loo acknowledged that he committed an oversight when he failed to*explicitly tell Capobianco about his right to an attorney before interviewing him on Feb. 12, 2014.
Loo said that he read aloud each line of the Maui Police Department's warnings and waiver form to Capobianco inside an audio and video recording room at the Wailuku Police Station. He said that Capobianco would initial each warning as he read it to him, but he did not go over the provision that advised Capobianco of his right to legal counsel.
"You can't say positively that he had time to stop and read" that he had a right to an attorney? defense attorney Jon Apo asked Loo.
"I cannot, sir," Loo replied.
Loo said Capobianco spoke to him and another detective inside a 10-by-10-foot room for about 30 minutes at the station."]
