- Joined
- Jul 15, 2014
- Messages
- 29,837
- Reaction score
- 206,903
Charles would've been able to speak because he's immediate family to JJ. But Charles is dead. So Charles' immediate family, his sister Kay, is speaking on his behalf.I don’t know whether Kay hired an attorney or whether the prosecution requested she be designated by the court to speak on behalf of CV when they first submitted the list of people for consideration for victim impact statements. But if VH is accurate in saying the prosecution has not filed any additional requests on her behalf then she needs to hire an attorney to see if they can help make this happen. I believe the order indicates the clarification of who VH is and the request to be designated by the court to represent TD’s deceased mother would have to come from the prosecution and I’m puzzled why this has not yet been done.
Also note - TD’s mother (VH’s sister) died on or about the same day the judge denied VH’s request to give a victim impact statement. So since his order on this, the situation has changed in that TD’s mother who would have had standing has passed away. I think VH could have been designated by the court prior to the death of TD’s mother since she was sick and in hospice but since it wasn’t filed with the court when she died, it certainly should have been by now.
VH should not “have” to hire an attorney but she might need to just to see that the new information is brought to the Judge before it’s too late.
Tammy's mom would've been able to speak because she's immediate family to Tammy. But Tammy's mom is dead. So Tammy's mom's immediate family, her sister, should be able to speak on her behalf.
That's my understanding of the situation and I do hope the judge will grant the aunt's request. It's not stepping outside the legal guidelines, imo, but seems like an "inherited" role family member can assume for deceased relatives.
Otherwise, Tammy really is left out, which feels like yet another betrayal against her.
jmo