- Joined
- Sep 13, 2003
- Messages
- 33,153
- Reaction score
- 171,557
1st BBM legitimate concern IMO and why I feel a special judge should be assigned from an area in Kentucky far far from Lechter County to avoid any possible suggestion of bias or conflict.Is there ANY judge in the area that won't have close connections to the victims? It will be hard to find someone that doesn't for the recusal standards.
Are they going to have to move to another county?
Could not agree more @ticya1st BBM legitimate concern IMO and why I feel a special judge should be assigned from an area in Kentucky far far from Lechter County to avoid any possible suggestion of bias or conflict.
2nd BBM Judge hasn't ruled yet on the request by prosecution to change venue and I go back on forth on what I think of moving the trial. Both victim and accused are so very well known throughout the county and both held positions of weight within it. MOO it will be difficult if not impossible to seat a jury full of local peers who haven't heard about the case, formed an opinion and who haven't had personal contact and dealings with one or both men. While I am generally not one who thinks a change in venue is necessary, I wonder if ever there was a case to be made for it, if maybe this one isn't it?
www.courttv.com
Defense wants judge removed
mountain-topmedia.com
I'm assuming Stines is going to try an insanity defense.given that the murder is on camera i cannot see how any jury can really be impartial!...i am thousands of miles away but could comfortably convict Stines
I'm assuming Stines is going to try an insanity defense.
It's going to be be a weird legal battle, IF the judge allows much of the backstory concerning the previous crimes in the judge's chambers etc. Stine's only hope is that the jury believes he was truly worried and disgusted about possible future bad acts against women, and Stines was irrational but trying to prevent that, etc...The whole world (if interested) knows who shot whom. Surely the only thing to be decided at first is if he was crazy or not. A trio/panel/group of psychiatrists (whatever is legally required) can opine on that, also any witnesses to prior weird behaviour. This is an unusual case, it shouldn't be the normal battle between prosecution and defence. Until and unless the mental experts decide that he isn't crazy and never was. Then business as usual.