GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #17 *Arrest*

[catpatrol]

Grand juries are typically for felonies. I would think its more than just interfering.

Interesting. I agree that a trial would not be necessary to determine that EA lied, and thus interfered with the investigation.

 

[TCMom]

Grand juries are typically for felonies. I would think its more than just interfering.

Good to know!

 

[Eileen730]

So all these Witnesses can be called.

 

[Eileen730]

Grand juries perform both accusatory and investigatory functions. The investigatory functions of the grand jury include obtaining and reviewing documents and other evidence and hearing the sworn testimony of witnesses that appear before it. The grand jury's accusatory function is to determine whether or not there is probable cause to believe that one or more persons committed a certain offense

Read on!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury

 

[Gigglingtoes]

So all these Witnesses can be called.

That will be so nice.

 

[TCMom]

I also have never heard of "interference with public duties". Is that a Texas law?

Yep! Texas Penal Code http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/38.15.00.html

 

[catpatrol]

Any idea if we will get any information from the grand jury (witness testimony, etc)? Or will all of that be private?

 

[volcarm]

I have a direct line to detective if you would like that as well...

Is there a PI on this case... I'm hoping so

 

[TCMom]

Aren't grand jury hearings sealed (not the decisions) but all the evidence, etc? So we may hear nothing out of it other than an indictment or a no bill on specific charges? AKA we still won't know much more than we know now, until trial.

 

[carltondance]

Any idea if we will get any information from the grand jury (witness testimony, etc)? Or will all of that be private?

typically sealed

 

[margarita25]

Yep! Texas Penal Code http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/38.15.00.html

From this link:

"§ 38.15. INTERFERENCE WITH PUBLIC DUTIES. (a) A person
commits an offense if the person with criminal negligence
interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with:
(1) a peace officer while the peace officer is
performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted by
law;
(2) a person who is employed to provide emergency
medical services including the transportation of ill or injured
persons while the person is performing that duty;
(3) a fire fighter, while the fire fighter is fighting
a fire or investigating the cause of a fire;
(4) an animal under the supervision of a peace
officer, corrections officer, or jailer, if the person knows the
animal is being used for law enforcement, corrections, prison or
jail security, or investigative purposes;
(5) the transmission of a communication over a
citizen's band radio channel, the purpose of which communication is
to inform or inquire about an emergency; or
(6) an officer with responsibility for animal control
in a county or municipality, while the officer is performing a duty
or exercising authority imposed or granted under Chapter 821 or
822, Health and Safety Code.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.
(c) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(1)
that the conduct engaged in by the defendant was intended to warn a
person operating a motor vehicle of the presence of a peace officer
who was enforcing Subtitle C, Title 7, Transportation Code.
(d) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that
the interruption, disruption, impediment, or interference alleged
consisted of speech only.
(e) In this section, "emergency" means a condition or
circumstance in which an individual is or is reasonably believed by
the person transmitting the communication to be in imminent danger
of serious bodily injury or in which property is or is reasonably
believed by the person transmitting the communication to be in
imminent danger of damage or destruction."

 

[Eileen730]

This is interesting also!

Prosecutors typically subpoena witnesses to appear before a grand jury because either:
•a prosecutor believes that a witness has information about a crime committed by a third party, and wants to elicit that information to secure an indictment against the third party, or
•a prosecutor regards a witness as a target (a person suspected of crime) and wants to develop evidence against the witness
Defense lawyers can often confer with the prosecutor to find out whether a client is the target of a grand jury investigation. If so, the defense lawyer may try to work out a deal in which the target agrees to testify before the grand jury in exchange for immunity from prosecution.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/testifying-before-a-grand-jury.html

 

[margarita25]

For curiosity's sake, I'm interested in seeing a side by side comparison of Travis Forbes' video interview (where he stated he had nothing to do with KM's disappearance), and EA's interviews (not that the potential motives here are necessarily the same)...

So, speaking of motives, what are you guys thinking was the likely motive here? SA? Accidental overdose? What are your opinions on how/why this all went down? Tia.

 

[Eileen730]

Lawyers are not permitted to accompany clients into the grand jury room. Grand jury proceedings are closed, and witnesses are not entitled to be represented by counsel during the proceedings. Lawyers may, however, remain in a nearby hallway, and witnesses may leave the room to consult with their lawyers as needed. Lawyers sometimes advise their clients to exercise this right before answering every question. For example, a witness might repeatedly say, “I respectfully request permission to leave the room to consult with my lawyer before I answer that question.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

But she was friendly enough with PP, to plan on staying the night, so it seems reasonable that she would borrow a shirt from her.

Unless I'm reading things wrong (and that's entirely possible), it only seems to be "after the fact" that the so called friends have, for whatever reason, disassociated themselves. Christina probably did consider them friends.

Your post made me think of something. What if Christina wasn't planning to spend the night. But, if it is true she ended up getting sick, she decided to spend the night and may have changed her shirt because she got sick. In other words, she didn't change her shirt because she planned to spend the night all along but because she got sick, her shirt got dirty and now she had to spend the night. Then, two hours later, she started to feel better (throwing up can help one feel better) so she decided to drive home afterall (as she really had wanted to do all along).

Therefore, telling Christina's mom that she planned to stay over isn't completely untrue. The friend just left out the reasons why decisions were made and unmade, the beginning and all other important information. Ugh!

New details have been released but are unconfirmed? I'll return to thread sixteen unless there's a quick answer. Ty.

 

[margarita25]

(FTR, I found EA's eyes/pupils odd, staring like, possibly dilated, anyone else? If already mentioned, sorry!)

Does EA have a history of violence? Tia.

 

[Mountaingazer]

I wonder if the grand jury subpoena was the reason for a certain "witness's" sudden social media blackout.

 

[truetexan]

I wonder if the grand jury subpoena was the reason for a certain "witness's" sudden social media blackout.

Reading my mind!:happydance:

 

[margarita25]

(Glad to see CM's case moving forward; I was worried there for a while, thought things were going nowhere) jmo

 

[suzyjackson]

Great news to see some movement today.

I asked at the end of the last thread if the timing of the release of more details of what Christina was wearing was significant, I guess this answers the question, I assume the two events are linked.

I'm not familiar with what the initials of the TV and radio stations mean but I think I understand from the above posts that it is a radio station that has been subpoenaed to provide interview details, didn't we have a TV station that was asked to do the same last week?