Holly Bobo, missing from TN 2014 discussion #4 ***ARRESTS***

[tlcya]

I'm not posting this in admiration for ZA in any way. These are just some of my observations of today's proceedings. ZA and his lawyer don't seem to be turning this case into a "me, me, me" media circus like JA and his attorney are doing. JA's actions in court shows just how much he does not respect the justice process. This from a 'Christian" man. IMO, the seriousness of the situation has gotten through to ZA's drug-addled mind. He knows he is up the creek without a paddle. I also think his attorney should be given confidential access to him. This would be a constitutional issue and might even be basis for overturning a guilty verdict on appeal.

BBM I agree with this. However it sounds as if the attorney basically asked for ZA to have privileges beyond that and I am not okay with ZA being in a position to further attempt to intimidate anyone who may have knowledge of this crime

 

[OldSteve]

Forgive if already posted,

Tennessee judge addresses questions in Holly Bobo case -

http://www.commercialappeal.com/new...ddresses-questions-in-holly/?CID=happeningnow

 

[Mr. Noatak]

I would certainly expect the defense to hammer this. I also don't think it's that big of a deal. Descriptions like that are rarely if ever going to be spot on. I never understood everyone's questioning CB's involvement because of it either. Bottom line is he was guessing. Might have been his best guess, but he was guessing. Ask me my neighbor's height who I was just standing outside talking to for an hour and I really don't know. It seems like I was taller than him at 6' 0" but I also wouldn't be shocked if I went back over there and found out he was a couple inches taller than me.

My opinions only, no facts here:

Holly's brother was probably not guessing. He was simply making a scale comparison. C'mon, we all do it. If you know one player on the basketball court is 6 feet 6", you can fairly easily estimate the height of another player, if they stand side-by-side.

You overlook what makes this witness description of the kidnapper different than most: the kidnapper is viewed side-by-side with Holly, at a walking pace, moving gradually away. The height of Holly is well known to her brother. This is the one case where the estimate of the kidnapper's height (relative to Holly) is probably pretty darn good.

The witness only has to estimate how many inches taller than Holly, is the kidnapper.

Frankly, I worry that the the witness description is correct and maybe we are looking for a stocky guy, who is six feet or less in height.

 

[SteveS]

:seeya: Hi Steve !

Yes, I agree, and do understand that there is a process, etc.

I probably did not convey what I was trying to say very well, BUT here's another attempt :facepalm::

The prosecutor still has SA's "immunity deal" pending -- and no telling what else is pending ...

So my question is this :

IF prosecutors have to share info with ZA's attorney PRIOR to SA's immunity deal or indictment, or anyone else's deal or indictment -- is it possible that sharing that info could jeopardize the continuing investigation and/or the trial against ZA and JA ?

Shouldn't the prosecutor have ALL their ducks in row ?

In other words, anyone who was involved with Holly's abduction/murder should be INDICTED or CHARGED or a DEAL in place BEFORE they start sharing info with any one of OTHER the defendants ...

I hope that made sense ...

:twocents: and :moo:

I understand your thought that the DA would like to have his cake and eat it too. But it doesn't work that way.

The prosecution had a choice. They could arrest (and deprive people of their liberty) based on the info they have and what they already know, and start the process that includes the mandatory requirement to disclose. Or they could forgo the arrests while investigating others. They chose to arrest, and any desire they have to keep their evidence secret is irrelevant.

 

[SteveS]

Absolutely agree. I believe the Judge has set deadlines by which the prosecution has to turn certain items over to the defense and if the prosecution unilaterally decides to not produce it until after that date, it could create problems. I don't suspect the prosecution is going to be busting their hump to get that discovery to the defense any sooner than they have to though.

From what I have seen of this case, the judge isn't going to put up with pushing things to the last minute. And frankly, that's not fair to the defense and their need to sort through the mass of evidence.

The judge's deadlines were for completion of the last bit of disclosure, but his demand was that they give up whatever they have NOW. If they aren't truly busting their hump, they are putting the case at risk.

 

[Mr. Noatak]

From what I have seen of this case, the judge isn't going to put up with pushing things to the last minute. And frankly, that's not fair to the defense and their need to sort through the mass of evidence.

The judge's deadlines were for completion of the last bit of disclosure, but his demand was that they give up whatever they have NOW. If they aren't truly busting their hump, they are putting the case at risk.

My opinions only, no facts here:

So far, I like this judge. Anyone who rejects a prosecution gag order request gets a big thumbs up from me. Now, regarding discovery, I hope he soon tells the prosecution to put up or shut up.

In criminal cases going to court, I always pretend that it is ME who is the defendant. If my life is on the line (potential death penalty case), do I want limited phone access? No. Do I want unsupervised private visits with my attorney. Yes! Do I want to be treated somewhat like an innocent person, unless and until found guilty? Darn right! BUT, in this case, as a defendant I would not feel that the bail situation is unfair. Based upon my past activities I could reasonably be viewed as a danger to the community if released before trial.

 

[ThoughtFox]

The reason ZA has no privileges in jail is because he "tried to coerce a witness" - his brother.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/...o-case/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Adams' lawyer also asked the judge to order the state to give Adams standard access to jail visitation, telephone privileges and basic mail services. Adams is only allowed to visit with family under his lawyer's supervision, and he has not been given access to a pencil and paper, Thompson said.

Adams is being treated that way under the jail's rules for someone who is charged with coercing a witness, Boswell said. Prosecutors allege Adams communicated a message to his brother to keep quiet about the Bobo case or "he will be in the hole beside her."

 

[Mr. Noatak]

My opinions only, no facts here:

To the mods- this post is relevant to the pending trial or trials in the Holly Bobo case. Read on.

I have followed criminal cases since the 1970's (if we only had the internet in the early days!). From the hundreds of cases I have followed to trial, I personally believe that if the jury is hung in the first trial, it should be over. End of story. You cannot be tried again IN ANY COURT. A more modern example of why I believe this: Raymond Lee Jennings. Check it out.

Think about what the defendants in a high-profile case such as this are facing. If there is a hung jury, they can be re-tried, for a million times if necessary (maybe in some states this is not true?), until the prosecutors can assemble 12 jurors who unanimously agree with a guilty verdict. What does this mean, in a philosophical sense? This is what it means: if all 12 jurors cannot find the defendant guilty, they are not guilty, BUT they are still "partly guilty" so they can be fully tried again and again until the "partly guilty" situation is resolved. This is completely illogical. IF by law it takes 12 jurors in agreement to have a guilty verdict, less than 12 jurors in agreement MUST be a not-guilty verdict. Remember, you cannot fall back on the return of the defendant to a "suspect" status after the hung jury, since they have been tried in court and the jury DID NOT CONVICT.

No double-jeopardy in the U.S., right? Let me show you how it really works. Here is my fictional but legally-factual thought experiment. A soldier from an army base, goes out on the town, gets drunk, and supposedly punches another drunk guy who is in a wheelchair and is making passes at the soldier's wife. No one in the bar actually sees the punch, but the guy in the wheelchair now has a black eye.

1) the soldier is charged with assault in criminal court by the city/state and after three hung-jury trials, the prosecutors give up.
2) the soldier is court-martialed by the military and found not guilty.
3) the Federal Government files civil-rights charges (based upon handicap of the man in the wheelchair) and after three hung-juries, the Feds give up.
4) the man is sued by the guy in the wheelchair and loses everything he owns in a civil trial (with its far lower standards of proof).

Quadruple jeopardy at this point, with a lot more than four separate trials!

Now, if the man in the wheelchair were a foreigner, and the U.S. was willing to extradite, it might be possible to be tried again in a foreign court. This is quintuple jeopardy.

I am working on a sextuple jeopardy thought experiment. This requires that the guy in the wheelchair has some international prominence, where an international court could be involved.

Other than entertaining my friends here at Websleuths, my point is this: if you do not have star-power defense (someone like Jose Baez), you will always be at a severe disadvantage to the prosecution in the many trials you may ultimately face. Is it any wonder that there are so many "no-contest" pleas and plea-bargains?

I am not just pontificating here. I will review my files on the Holly Bobo case for someone who actually fits the FBI description.

 

[Tugela]

The reason ZA has no privileges in jail is because he "tried to coerce a witness" - his brother.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/...o-case/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

How was this message communicated? Through another person looking to get a deal on their own charges?

 

[Mr. Noatak]

The reason ZA has no privileges in jail is because he "tried to coerce a witness" - his brother.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/...o-case/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

My opinions only, no facts here:

I brought up the possibility of the utterly predictable "jail house confession" by the main suspect on Websleuths before this event ever happened. This kind of jailbird he said-they said felon finger-pointing is a cliche in high-profile cases. Without a wiretap of the conversation, it is unfortunately, a predictable and possibly dubious distraction from the facts of the case.

 

[Tugela]

:seeya: Hi Steve !

Yes, I agree, and do understand that there is a process, etc.

I probably did not convey what I was trying to say very well, BUT here's another attempt :facepalm::

The prosecutor still has SA's "immunity deal" pending -- and no telling what else is pending ...

So my question is this :

IF prosecutors have to share info with ZA's attorney PRIOR to SA's immunity deal or indictment, or anyone else's deal or indictment -- is it possible that sharing that info could jeopardize the continuing investigation and/or the trial against ZA and JA ?

Shouldn't the prosecutor have ALL their ducks in row ?

In other words, anyone who was involved with Holly's abduction/murder should be INDICTED or CHARGED or a DEAL in place BEFORE they start sharing info with any one of OTHER the defendants ...

I hope that made sense ...

:twocents: and :moo:

The only way disclosure could jeopardize the trial would be if they had charged without just cause. in which case that is best dealt with sooner than later.

As for any continuing investigation, they should have essentially completed the investigation before charging, so whatever else that might come out should have no impact. If they wanted to delay sharing discovery because they are looking at other people as well, then they should have delayed charging as well.

Once charges are laid the wheels start turning. Putting roadblocks in front of that because they are not ready just jeopardizes their case.

The usual reason for delaying discovery is because the case is weak and the DA is hoping for a hail Mary to come in during the interim, or to reduce the time the defence has to prepare so a weak case could slip through in trial. A professional prosecutor will have no issue in delivering discovery.

 

[Tugela]

Absolutely agree. I believe the Judge has set deadlines by which the prosecution has to turn certain items over to the defense and if the prosecution unilaterally decides to not produce it until after that date, it could create problems. I don't suspect the prosecution is going to be busting their hump to get that discovery to the defense any sooner than they have to though.

If there are 23000 pages, they had better get busy, because that is a lot of photocopying. It is not something they could start the day before the deadline.

 

[Mr. Noatak]

The only way disclosure could jeopardize the trial would be if they had charged without just cause. in which case that is best dealt with sooner than later.

As for any continuing investigation, they should have essentially completed the investigation before charging, so whatever else that might come out should have no impact. If they wanted to delay sharing discovery because they are looking at other people as well, then they should have delayed charging as well.

Once charges are laid the wheels start turning. Putting roadblocks in front of that because they are not ready just jeopardizes their case.

The usual reason for delaying discovery is because the case is weak and the DA is hoping for a hail Mary to come in during the interim, or to reduce the time the defence has to prepare so a weak case could slip through in trial. A professional prosecutor will have no issue in delivering discovery.

My opinions only, no facts here:

I am skeptical of any singular piece of "magical" evidence (watch out for this!). It may be enough to convince a jury, but this never works for me. I want multiple examples of physical evidence. I want to know what factually happened, not what some black suits are claiming happened.

 

[ThoughtFox]

How was this message communicated? Through another person looking to get a deal on their own charges?

ZA gave the message to another inmate who was being transferred to the same jail as his brother. They don't name the informant, for obvious reasons.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/holly-bobo-murder-suspect-faces-new-charge/

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) says agents served an arrest warrant on the new charge against 29-year-old Zachary Adams on Tuesday.

An inmate told TBI investigators that when Adams learned that inmate was going to be transferred to the Obion County Jail, where Adams' brother is being held, he asked the inmate to pass a message along to his brother, according to the affidavit. The station reports that the message said, in part, "He's the one who started this s*** and if he don't shut his mouth he will be in the hole beside her."

According to the affidavit, a different inmate overheard Adams make the threat.

Adams was already being held without bond in Chester County on first-degree murder and aggravated kidnapping charges in the Bobo case.

 

[pearl]

The following is just my opinion on the defense requests for ZA and SA.
The justice process in the past has played fast and loose with these guys their entire criminal careers. Criminal careers is just what they lived. This is evidenced when their rap sheets are compared to the incredibly small amount of time they actually spent incarcerated for these crimes. This time, things obviously are not happening like the status quo they expect. They do not like this happening to them. I read about requests made that sound like they want special treatment. JA wants access afforded to him that other inmates at Riverbend do not get. ZA wants access afforded to him that other inmates who are charged with a crime and also charged with coercion of a witness don't get. ZA wants evidence given to his lawyers that may not be complete yet. I confidently feel that, yes, there is plenty of evidence, probably both physical and circumstantial, to indict and convict these guys. It might have taken 3 years to get this far, but I really don't think LE would make these charges without the evidence to support them. I forget how many thousands of pages of evidence the TBI said it had. I suspect the next defense request will be for the prosecution to organize it for them. IMO, all this defense business is doing is what it is intended to do and that is take the attention away from the crimes committed against Holly and try to garner attention for the guys indicted for these crimes. There are constitutional issues that must be considered by both the prosecution and defense. The accused should be given their due process but no more than other criminals have received. In other words, no special treatment like they are accustomed to getting. I can only describe it as special treatment when I consider their crimes versus the amount of time they spent in prison or jail. I don't think the prosecution should be required to act any faster than they do when dealing with other criminals. I think of the Lauren Giddings case in GA where the defense motions allowed time for very damaging evidence against the accused to be discovered. Had the trial started when scheduled, this info probably would not have been found. This case with ZA and JA will be monitored with a magnifying glass. I don't think this time justice will be fast or loose with these guys.

 

[reedus23]

BBM I agree with this. However it sounds as if the attorney basically asked for ZA to have privileges beyond that and I am not okay with ZA being in a position to further attempt to intimidate anyone who may have knowledge of this crime

ZA and JA should have the exact same access/privileges as any other inmate. If the policy is bad, it needs to be changed for ALL. These 2 deserve no special treatment.

 

[reedus23]

My opinions only, no facts here:

Holly's brother was probably not guessing. He was simply making a scale comparison. C'mon, we all do it. If you know one player on the basketball court is 6 feet 6", you can fairly easily estimate the height of another player, if they stand side-by-side.

You overlook what makes this witness description of the kidnapper different than most: the kidnapper is viewed side-by-side with Holly, at a walking pace, moving gradually away. The height of Holly is well known to her brother. This is the one case where the estimate of the kidnapper's height (relative to Holly) is probably pretty darn good.

The witness only has to estimate how many inches taller than Holly, is the kidnapper.

Frankly, I worry that the the witness description is correct and maybe we are looking for a stocky guy, who is six feet or less in height.

But he is not doing that at the time of witnessing events. He is having to go back in his memory bank and recollect the events to try to remember how much taller. This is why I say he was guessing. Also, if he wasn't guessing, there wouldn't have been a range given. Was the perp standing straight up and down? Were they back to back? There are a lot of variables that go in to it all of which makes one take his guesstimate with a grain of salt. But yes, it will be hammered on by defense counsel. All inconsistencies will be, but they are in every case. The DA knows this.

 

[reedus23]

From what I have seen of this case, the judge isn't going to put up with pushing things to the last minute. And frankly, that's not fair to the defense and their need to sort through the mass of evidence.

The judge's deadlines were for completion of the last bit of disclosure, but his demand was that they give up whatever they have NOW. If they aren't truly busting their hump, they are putting the case at risk.

Respectfully disagree SteveS. There is nothing that says they have to provide discovery NOW. In fact, the order says they can produce it ON August 29 or they can produce it before if they want. They do have a duty to supplement that discovery after the 29th if they find new information. The Judge certainly felt the timing and dates were fair to the defense or else he would have included a requirement that the discovery be produced NOW.

 

[SteveS]

Respectfully disagree SteveS. There is nothing that says they have to provide discovery NOW. In fact, the order says they can produce it ON August 29 or they can produce it before if they want. They do have a duty to supplement that discovery after the 29th if they find new information. The Judge certainly felt the timing and dates were fair to the defense or else he would have included a requirement that the discovery be produced NOW.

No sir. The info/order you provided is out of date info. The need to provide disclosure NOW, as much as possible as soon as possible, rather than waiting with anything, that was part of what the June 4 hearing was about, in fact. It was a response to the way the DA was responding to that order you showed.

[I don't disagree that they don't yet have to offer up info they don't even have yet, but that's really not an issue. How could they hand over what they don't have? Obviously they cannot.]

But on what they already have, that was one reason they were in court, only one week after that order was written. The DA wanted to play the game you are proposing, and the judge shoved them up against the wall instead and said, "No way."

The point made quite clear yesterday was that the deadline isn't the start date, it's the end date of discovery. The judge is not going to allow the state to pile it up and keep it, but rather hand it over as fast as possible. Right now the leash is flexible, in the way it was written, but he made it clear that his intent is more strict and it's up to the DA to act accordingly.

My take is that despite the latitude of the end-of-summer date, if the defense doesn't start seeing this evidence in droves, pronto, the DA faces the strong possibility of issues with the judge, and based on yesterday's hearing, I think the judge would come down hard on the DA. A new order with new deadlines and very strict requirements can be written at any time, if that's what it takes. Despite the earlier order as written, the DA's LEGAL obligation is to hold back nothing, and common sense makes it clear that there's no way that 29 volumes will all be done on the very last day. The defense should be getting tons of info immediately, and piles more every week.

The article:

DECATURVILLE, Tenn. — Prosecutors should not wait until the end of a court-ordered 90-day period to hand over all their evidence to the defense for a man charged in the disappearance of a Tennessee nursing student, a judge said Wednesday.

Zachary Adams, 29, was indicted on murder and kidnapping charges in March in the April 2011 disappearance of 20-year-old Holly Bobo. Another man, Jason Autry, 39, faces the same charges. Both have pleaded not guilty.

Decatur County Circuit Judge Charles Creed McGinley said prosecutors could start furnishing evidence they have already gathered in the case to Adams’ lawyer, Jennifer Lynn Thompson. She had complained that prosecutors had not given her evidence she needs, while also arguing her client was not being given standard access to mail and family visits in the Chester County Jail.

Bobo disappeared from her home in rural Parsons and a massive search in the fields and woods of West Tennessee proved fruitless. Prosecutors and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation have released few details about the case, although they have said that Bobo’s body has not been found.

Thompson filed motions asking McGinley to make prosecutors give her any favorable evidence that pertains to her client’s guilt or innocence, including witness statements and search warrants. Thompson also wants the state to tell her what punishment may be imposed if Adams is found guilty at trial. Prosecutors have not ruled out the death penalty.

Prosecutor Beth Boswell said she is working to assemble the evidence, and she will disclose all that she must under the law.

McGinley said prosecutors should furnish evidence to Thompson as they gather it.

“This is a case of unusual complexity because of the length of time the investigation has gone on,” McGinley said.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2014/jun/05/judge-addresses-evidence-questions-bobo-case/

 

[jggordo]

I believe prosecution is filtering OUT any information they got from SA at this point in that they themselves stated they intend not to use him as a witness. Thompson already is looking for search warrant information as to whether they used his information to obtain those search warrants. In the event they did, it could be problems. LE has already called him a liar and not truthful.

I don't know if anyone has called the County Clerk in Decatur to find out when Austin's case is to be heard, but it should be public record. Until that immunity deal is put to bed I believe LE will not start to show their position until then. If the case was ready to be heard by the Chancery Court it also should be ready for the District Court. When the Judge said he did not want to come into court every 30 days for rulings...he should back that up.

JMO's