GUILTY MI - David Montaldi for raping, beating 1yo girl, Mount Clemens, 2010

New Posts

melissasmom said:
Oops, guess I should actually go through looking for articles before I shoot my mouth off. LOL Just got home from work, very tired. :)
Here is an article posted TODAY. Jury began deliberations today!

http://www.macombdaily.com/articles/2012/01/27/news/doc4f22fe47dde8f206090417.txt
Click to expand...

The article has updated...why is this jury taking so long??? The jury could never give him what he deserves, jmo


A Macomb County jury on Monday will return to deliberating whether to convict a former aspiring doctor of sexually assaulting and abusing the 13-month-old daughter of his girlfriend.

A jury failed to reach a verdict after about five hours of deliberations Friday in Macomb County Circuit Court in the case of David Montaldi, 33, of Mount Clemens
 
As an aside-he was only wearing a bullet proof vest when the mug shot happened? I mean really?

 
fhc said:
http://www.macombdaily.com/articles/2012/01/30/news/doc4f26fd242136f474076215.txt

Jury: We’re deadlocked on former hospital intern’s fate

WTH is wrong with juries these days?????????????????? Sitting on my hands
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting this, fhc. I cannot believe the jury is deadlocked. To me this case seems pretty cut and dried. I mean, really, he dropped her? 2 experts testified that her injuries could not have been caused by this. Please, jury, do the right thing! I'm glad the judge told them to keep at it.

I also noticed something when I was looking at the court docket a few minutes ago. This:
01/26/2012 HELD: PLACED ON RECORD, CONTD TESTMNY TKN, DFNS MTNS FOR DIRECTED VERDICT AS TO CTS 1 &2: DENIED, ADJ TO 1/27/12 @ 9AM The following event: CONTINUED JURY TRIAL scheduled for 01/26/2012 at 10:00 am has been resulted as follows: Result: HELD-CRIMINAL Judge: BIERNAT JR, JAMES M Location: COURTROOM D - 3RD FLOOR Result Staff: Staff: COURT REPORTER: VIDEO Certification Number

Now, this was back on the 26th, but I just now noticed it. Doesn't that mean that the defense was wanting the judge to render the verdict instead of the jury? Maybe his lawyer wasn't too sure about his defense strategy. If you want to call it that

Also noticed this from the 27th:

01/27/2012 REQ AND NTC FOR FILM AND ELECTRONIC MEDIA COERAGE OF COURT PROCEEDINGS

Sounds like someone wanted to be able to film these proceedings? What do you make of this? But I dont see anywhere where it was denied or granted.
 
melissasmom said:
Thanks for posting this, fhc. I cannot believe the jury is deadlocked. To me this case seems pretty cut and dried. I mean, really, he dropped her? 2 experts testified that her injuries could not have been caused by this. Please, jury, do the right thing! I'm glad the judge told them to keep at it.

I also noticed something when I was looking at the court docket a few minutes ago. This:
01/26/2012 HELD: PLACED ON RECORD, CONTD TESTMNY TKN, DFNS MTNS FOR DIRECTED VERDICT AS TO CTS 1 &2: DENIED, ADJ TO 1/27/12 @ 9AM The following event: CONTINUED JURY TRIAL scheduled for 01/26/2012 at 10:00 am has been resulted as follows: Result: HELD-CRIMINAL Judge: BIERNAT JR, JAMES M Location: COURTROOM D - 3RD FLOOR Result Staff: Staff: COURT REPORTER: VIDEO Certification Number

Now, this was back on the 26th, but I just now noticed it. Doesn't that mean that the defense was wanting the judge to render the verdict instead of the jury? Maybe his lawyer wasn't too sure about his defense strategy. If you want to call it that

Also noticed this from the 27th:

01/27/2012 REQ AND NTC FOR FILM AND ELECTRONIC MEDIA COERAGE OF COURT PROCEEDINGS

Sounds like someone wanted to be able to film these proceedings? What do you make of this? But I dont see anywhere where it was denied or granted.
Click to expand...

Great Find...I could only guess at what these notations mean. We do have a thread here to ask questions of WSers that are attorneys.
 
I am pretty sure you are correct-defense filed a motion to have the judge decide counts one and two-judge denied the motion.
 
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/directed+verdict

directed verdict n. a verdict by a jury based on the specific direction by a trial judge that they must bring in that verdict because one of the parties has not proved his/her/its case as a matter of law (failed to present credible testimony on some key element of the claim or of the defense). A judge in a criminal case may direct a verdict of acquittal on the basis the prosecution has not proved its case, but the judge may not direct a verdict of guilty, since that would deprive the accused of the constitutional right to a jury trial.

I stand corrected-defense is claiming the state did not prove the case.
 
believe09 said:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/directed+verdict

directed verdict n. a verdict by a jury based on the specific direction by a trial judge that they must bring in that verdict because one of the parties has not proved his/her/its case as a matter of law (failed to present credible testimony on some key element of the claim or of the defense). A judge in a criminal case may direct a verdict of acquittal on the basis the prosecution has not proved its case, but the judge may not direct a verdict of guilty, since that would deprive the accused of the constitutional right to a jury trial.

I stand corrected-defense is claiming the state did not prove the case.
Click to expand...

Thanks!! Oh, so I get it. That is proably standard procedure after closing arguments and before the jury is charged. Thanks for looking that up. :)
 
fhc said:
Great Find...I could only guess at what these notations mean. We do have a thread here to ask questions of WSers that are attorneys.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, there are some threads on some of the featured cases, but not a general thread that I know of. But there are so many. lol But looks like believe09 found the correct answer.
:)
 
If the jury is hung, I wonder if it is on the charges themselves or guilt/innocence?
 
I cannot imagine why this jury is deadlocked. He injured the baby's vaginal and anal areas by cleaning her? What kind of fool would believe this? Juries of late leave a lot to be desired.
 
Ok, just had to post again real quick. this article does not seem to be correct or have the whole story. I am looking at the court docket now. Will return shortly with an update after I decipher it. :(


ETA: The court has declared the jury DEADLOCKED. From the looks of it, a new trial has been scheduled.

From docket: 01/31/2012 HELD: PLACED ON RECORD, CONTD JURY DELIBERATIONS, JURY RETURNED @ 4:15PM, COURT DECLARES DEADLOCKED JURY

And this: 01/31/2012 PRETRIAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED The following event: CONTINUED JURY TRIAL scheduled for 01/31/2012 at 8:30 am has been rescheduled as follows: Event: PRETRIAL CONFERENCE Date: 02/21/2012 Time: 1:30 pm Judge: BIERNAT JR, JAMES M Location: COURTROOM D - 3RD FLOOR

Aargh, I can't believe it. I wish I could talk to this jury. How did they think this poor baby was injured to such a horrid extent? How did she get vaginal and anal injuries? She was 13 MONTHS old. I have to take a breather here for a few.

I guess I should be glad there is going to be another trial.

ETA AGAIN: I guess I just read the article incorrectly. I thought it said the jury was ordered to return to deliberations for Wed. My apologies to the author of the article. Still mad though.
 
I know that nobody wanted a hung jury... but I also bet everybody would have preferred that in Florida last summer...

If the judge had kept pushing and pushing and pushing we easily could have ended up with a "well fine, we will just acquit the guy and hope he didn't do it so we can go home..." situation.

This was the best option if they couldn't agree.
 
MsFacetious said:
I know that nobody wanted a hung jury... but I also bet everybody would have preferred that in Florida last summer...

If the judge had kept pushing and pushing and pushing we easily could have ended up with a "well fine, we will just acquit the guy and hope he didn't do it so we can go home..." situation.

This was the best option if they couldn't agree.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right. :) I am just frustrated, I thought the jury would clearly see through the defense this guy concocted. I hope the next jury comes to a swift and just conclusion.
 
I still want to know what they were deadlocked on-guilt/innocence or the charges themselves, kwim?
 
fhc said:
the big question i have is will he remain in custody until the next trial like he has up until this trial????

here is a link to the mistrial article

http://www.macombdaily.com/articles/2012/01/31/news/doc4f28667b025c4999881383.txt

Aspiring doctor’s trial ends in hung jury

Prosecuting and defense attorneys will proceed toward a likely second trial. A pretrial was set for Feb. 21.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the updated article. He is currently being held with no bond. I know his attorneys could ask for a hearing, but I didn't see anything in the docket as yet where a hearing was requested. Maybe Rabaut knows it is pointless, the judge is not letting him out.

So I guess now, we wait. I wonder if next time there will be more media coverage? I'm still puzzled as to what was stumping these jurors, but that is over with so I won't dwell on it. On to the retrial.....

:)
 
Arrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhh! I thought this was an easy case, jury wise. Egads. I know a hung jury is better than a not-guilty, but this case just seems so very simple. It is not complicated at all. There was no one else with the baby. The injuries speak for themselves. If the vaginal and anal injuries were caused by cleaning, he must have used an SOS pad. What the hell were they hung on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 93 more.
Total: 566 (members: 94, guests: 472)

Online statistics

Members online
94
Guests online
472
Total visitors
566
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
626,468
Messages
18,526,642
Members
241,053
Latest member
ATwistedSolo
Back
Top