Zellner Tweets

[Limaes]

So in other words, her strategy is to free him on a technicality rather than proof of innocence. What happened to all this evidence she has uncovered?



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[missy1974]

Prosecutorial misconduct is conduct which violates court rules or ethical standards of law practice. Examples, among others, may include:

• Courtroom misconduct (making improper remarks or improperly introducing evidence designed to prejudice the jury: violating rules regarding selection of the jury; or making improper closing arguments);
• Hiding, destroying or tampering with evidence, case files or court records;
• Failing to disclose evidence that might tend to exonerate the defendant
• Threatening, badgering or tampering with witnesses;
• Presenting false or misleading evidence;
• Selective or vindictive prosecution
• Denial of a speedy trial rights
• Use of unreliable and untruthful witnesses and snitches

http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/prosecutorial-misconduct/

If she finds evidence of any of the above (BBM) in regards to Kratz in this case, that is not a technicality if it is based on improper evidence in the first place. I also bolded the 'selective or vindictive prosecution' because I believe it would apply in this case as well.

From what I have read about Zellner, she will go through everything, she gets to file once and she will have everything in it, what her tweet implies to me is that the Prosecutors actions are far more important to the overall picture than Strang and Butings "ineffective counsel" claims that she will no doubt also go into, but not as significant.

 

[Limaes]

Prosecutorial misconduct is conduct which violates court rules or ethical standards of law practice. Examples, among others, may include:

• Courtroom misconduct (making improper remarks or improperly introducing evidence designed to prejudice the jury: violating rules regarding selection of the jury; or making improper closing arguments);
• Hiding, destroying or tampering with evidence, case files or court records;
• Failing to disclose evidence that might tend to exonerate the defendant
• Threatening, badgering or tampering with witnesses;
• Presenting false or misleading evidence;
• Selective or vindictive prosecution
• Denial of a speedy trial rights
• Use of unreliable and untruthful witnesses and snitches

http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/prosecutorial-misconduct/

If she finds evidence of any of the above (BBM) in regards to Kratz in this case, that is not a technicality if it is based on improper evidence in the first place. I also bolded the 'selective or vindictive prosecution' because I believe it would apply in this case as well.

From what I have read about Zellner, she will go through everything, she gets to file once and she will have everything in it, what her tweet implies to me is that the Prosecutors actions are far more important to the overall picture than Strang and Butings "ineffective counsel" claims that she will no doubt also go into, but not as significant.

She has tweeted incessantly about evidence and, my personal favourite, science!

Evidence, through science goes a long way to proving innocence. Going after the prosecutor does not. You can twist it as much as you like. This is a "technicality" not proof of innocence.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

It has come to my mind, as of late dear Missy, as much as I would LOVE to see the real killer exposed, SO much of the " evidence " WAS in fact tainted ( IMO ) no interviews conducted, etc. what's left?

Zellner may indeed have evidence that to her & her team ( even some of us ) seems pretty logical, however, to get it through to the " appeals process" who knows??

And twist away!!
IMO, why shouldn't SA be free by ANY means necessary, since it's JUST the way he was CONVICTED.

Prosecutorial misconduct is conduct which violates court rules or ethical standards of law practice. Examples, among others, may include:

• Courtroom misconduct (making improper remarks or improperly introducing evidence designed to prejudice the jury: violating rules regarding selection of the jury; or making improper closing arguments);
• Hiding, destroying or tampering with evidence, case files or court records;
• Failing to disclose evidence that might tend to exonerate the defendant
• Threatening, badgering or tampering with witnesses;
• Presenting false or misleading evidence;
• Selective or vindictive prosecution
• Denial of a speedy trial rights
• Use of unreliable and untruthful witnesses and snitches

http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/prosecutorial-misconduct/

If she finds evidence of any of the above (BBM) in regards to Kratz in this case, that is not a technicality if it is based on improper evidence in the first place. I also bolded the 'selective or vindictive prosecution' because I believe it would apply in this case as well.

From what I have read about Zellner, she will go through everything, she gets to file once and she will have everything in it, what her tweet implies to me is that the Prosecutors actions are far more important to the overall picture than Strang and Butings "ineffective counsel" claims that she will no doubt also go into, but not as significant.

 

[Hippiemomof5]

 

[Jaiddie]

This one is one of my favorites so far...not so cryptic, and she is not pulling any punches now, LOL.

 

[Limaes]

Lol Oh dear!
#MakingMoneyOffAMurderer
#QueenOfLoopholes

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

You & I have been on the same page all along, Jaiddie::highfive:

This one is one of my favorites so far...not so cryptic, and she is not pulling any punches now, LOL.

 

[missy1974]

Yep, that tweet is pretty clear!! I like her hashtag .... #Pridegoethbeforefall ;-)

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I wonder what they know at this point. Is it something that will definitely exonerate SA or is it something else?

 

[missy1974]

I wonder what they know at this point. Is it something that will definitely exonerate SA or is it something else?

I wish she would tweet what she knows LOL but I guess we will have to wait until she files something. She seems so confident, but then most defense attorneys are, right? (Unless your name is Len LOL) The only difference with Zellner that I see, is that she has chosen to take this case. SA is not paying her, she wasn't appointed the case, so she can walk away at any time. I wonder if she has someone who is talking, whether LE or someone else 'involved'?

 

[missy1974]

hmmm wasn't sure what thread to put this in, so I picked this one LOL

 

[Limaes]

People must be losing interest so they're jumping on Kratz' coat tails to get it back


Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Hippiemomof5]

People must be losing interest so they're jumping on Kratz' coat tails to get it back

Seriously!?!? Kratz offered NO PROOF behind his theory on what happened or his sick and twisted press conference. He's disgusting!

 

[Limaes]

Omg! Muddying up Kratz does not clean Avery. Teresa's body was obliterated into rubble. Unfair to use this as proof of no rape. Do you think he killed her so no one would find out she beat him at tiddly winks?

He killed her, and reduced her life to rubble because he raped her and wanted to erase his DNA just so he wouldn't go back to jail.

What I personally find disgusting, is reading comments from females who steadfastily refuse to acknowledge SA's violent history against women including his family members and then use the fact that he totally mutilated the poor girl's body as a defence with the continual diatribe of "there is no proof". Of course it can't be proven but that doesn't mean it didn't happen and in all probability, it did happen.

#TeamTeresa


Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[missy1974]

No one has to muddy up Kratz, he's done that all on his own. This is not a new topic, it's been discussed for months. We have a thread about Kratz here

I don't know any individuals (male or female, because I have no idea what gender most posters are), that have refused to acknowledge SA's history. I do know a lot of posters believe that just because he did something in the past, it doesn't make him a murderer, probably why most courts wouldn't allow prior bad acts in a trial, as was the case in this trial.

 

[LifeCitizen]

Omg! Muddying up Kratz does not clean Avery. Teresa's body was obliterated into rubble. Unfair to use this as proof of no rape. Do you think he killed her so no one would find out she beat him at tiddly winks?

He killed her, and reduced her life to rubble because he raped her and wanted to erase his DNA just so he wouldn't go back to jail.

What I personally find disgusting, is reading comments from females who steadfastily refuse to acknowledge SA's violent history against women including his family members and then use the fact that he totally mutilated the poor girl's body as a defence with the continual diatribe of "there is no proof". Of course it can't be proven but that doesn't mean it didn't happen and in all probability, it did happen.

#TeamTeresa


Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Well, I'm a female and am following the case. You're right his history doesn't look good. I agree. SA was an *******. Basically raped his own niece etc BUT, I'm not convinced he was/is a killer.

Either he's a borderline , or he isn't.

To me, he isn't smart enough to be such a good actor after the fact. I just don't see it. I don't know what happened to poor TH.

She left the property. from what KZ has said. I believe her.

 

[Hippiemomof5]

As a prosecutor, he should have had evidence to back his tale when he spoke at the press conference. None of TH's blood or dna was found inside SA's trailer, where he supposed tied her up, raped her and sliced her throat, NOT EVEN ON HER OWN CAR KEY!! You get a story from a 16 year old, you should probably check it with facts to make sure it all fits. "Her body was burned so she MUST have been raped" is the lamest "proof" I've ever heard.

SA is not a nice guy and has done lots of evil, but that doesn't prove he's a murderer.

 

[Limaes]

No one has to muddy up Kratz, he's done that all on his own. This is not a new topic, it's been discussed for months. We have a thread about Kratz here

I don't know any individuals (male or female, because I have no idea what gender most posters are), that have refused to acknowledge SA's history. I do know a lot of posters believe that just because he did something in the past, it doesn't make him a murderer, probably why most courts wouldn't allow prior bad acts in a trial, as was the case in this trial.

Missy, I am well aware of the Kratz thread. Zellner is tweeting about Kratz, so I am replying here.

No one can say "no proof" he is a murderer and also claim "they planted" without backing it up with proof. Attacking the Prosecutor isn't proof no matter how many times the unprofessional Zellner does so.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Jaiddie]

People must be losing interest so they're jumping on Kratz' coat tails to get it back


Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

IMO, people have been on Kratz all along, as it should be. He more than deserves it. First, that disgusting press conference (that was not only highly unfair and unethical for SA and BD, but had to have been a nightmare for TH's family) which consisted of his own sick fantasies because there was NO evidence to back what he claimed, whatsoever. I am very happy that Zellner & Co. are finally holding this man accountable for his immoral and unethical behavior. Should have happened a long time ago, IMHO, because he shouldn't have been able to convict two different men for murdering the same young woman in two different places, and in two entirely different ways as he did. While Kratz is not the only one responsible for how that ludicrous investigation and trials went down (LE and the Media played just as big a part) I say it's high time that the TRUTH finally comes out, and I am very much hoping that Zellner can deliver it. With her being able to successfully do it 17 times before already, my money is on her.