Tommy Croslin claims mistreatment in Putman Jail per Att

[Concerned Papa]

You are correct except for the Judge's ruling. Werter dimissed his motion prior to the Judge ruling on the motion.

IMO, moving parties only dismiss their motions when they get what they want. In this case, Werter's priority was for LE to agree to not question Tommy without his presences and they did.

IMO, as far as the other claims, no way would LE ever admit to those claims. They would be opening themselves up to claims and/or lawsuits by other inmates. IMO, those were in there as a warning only and the warning was received. I am not saying they are true in any way.

How do we know that Werter dismissed his motion before the Judge could rule on the State's Motion To Dismiss?

 

[krkrjx]

A Motion for Hearing cannot be dismissed by a judge without a hearing. Werter wanted the issue heard but then something occurred that he didn't want or need a hearing anymore.

Even if the judge thought the complaint unfounded, he would not dismiss out of the blue without a hearing. Since this was dismissed prior to hearing, it appears as though the complainant (TC via his attorney) made the Motion to Dismiss.

Either there was an agreement between the parties or plaintiff realized there was no evidence to support what they were claiming. Given the level of reporting in the area, we may never know which. JMO.

ETA: If this had proceeded to hearing, the state could have made a Motion to Dismiss and had that granted if there was insufficient evidence to support the allegations. The fact that it was dismissed without hearing leans toward Werter making the Motion or at least agreeing to the dismissal. Why, we don't know, but I suspect it is due to lack of evidence to move forward on the complaint. JMO.

 

[Whisperer]

So is Werter the Attorney of Record for TC regarding the Cummings Case?

 

[krkrjx]

Retaining an attorney is an agreement between the individual and the attorney, sometimes just an informal verbal agreement. Werter is TC's attorney and has been since not long after the trafficking arrest. He has spoken for TC on other issues, which he certainly can do if TC wants him to speak on his behalf.

I am not sure Werter sees himself as TC's attorney in the Haleigh case since as far as any legal proceedings go there is no Haleigh case--it is still in LE's hands and in the investigatory phase.

Shoemaker came onboard for RC long before he was arrested for trafficking, yet is representing him for the trafficking charges.

Fields was Misty's attorney well before her arrest for trafficking, yet is representing her for the trafficking charges.

I think if either of those two had a mistreatment by LE claim, their attorneys would do the honors. JMO.

 

[1Chump]

Hmmm, that certainly seems strange to a non attorney such as myself. We've all seen Judges dismiss murder charges, etc. for lack of evidence.

You're saying a Judge can't dismiss a Motion for the same reason?

Judges do not "dismiss" a case.

The Judge is actually ruling on a Motion to Dismiss and grants the motion by issuing an Order Granting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Order to Dismiss. So reporting that a Judge dismissed a case is kind of shorthand for the Judge issued an Order to Dismiss on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss.

So the answer is no, Judge's cannot dismiss a motion. Judge's have to rule on the motion by eithr granting or denying the motion. The Order is specific to the Motion. A Motion to Continue will have an Order to Continue Order Denying Continuation.

In this case, Tommy filed a Motion for Order to Show Cause (OSC.) If the Judge ruled on the Motion his order would be Order Granting OSC or Order Denying OSC.

The motion was dismissed on July 13, three days before the hearing date. The only one who can dismiss a motion prior to the hearing is the person who filed the motion.

 

[1Chump]

How do we know that Werter dismissed his motion before the Judge could rule on the State's Motion To Dismiss?

The hearing was scheduled for July 16. The Judge does not rule until the hearing. Also the State's Motion to Dismiss was really an "Opposition" to Tommy's Motion. The wording on that is strange.

The Judge rules on the Original Motion.

 

[lil momma]

Thanks 1Chump!

How very confusing...lol but i think i got it!

 

[1Chump]

Thanks 1Chump!

How very confusing...lol but i think i got it!

Your welcome. It really is not complicated though. The Judge's main job is to make rulings on the law. The Judge is an impartial person who only concern is the law. That is his only job. The Judge just sits there, listens, and takes notes for any potential rulings.

The Judge only takes action when asked to take action either formally or informally. Formally meaning "written" and informal "oral" request.

A Judge is not supposed to take any action without being asked.