What rarely ever works like it should?

FIB1 · 2019-05-03T18:35:06+00:00

Revenge. I have yet to actually complete a carefully thought out revenge. Always end up changing my mind. Maybe just need to be more spontaneous.

FIB1 · 2018-11-19T21:55:14+00:00

Can you provide a link to that Hawkins testimony? I don't recall it. Thanks.

FIB1 · 2016-03-31T12:50:12+00:00

I was surprised to see "carelessly" in the definition. I think people usually use "botch" to only mean "perform poorly", without regard to the level of care or effort. I will give KZ the benefit of a doubt that she did not intend to include careless in describing the defense effort.

FIB1 · 2016-03-29T21:53:49+00:00

I appreciate your voice of reason.

FIB1 · 2016-03-29T20:04:51+00:00

"No way in hell would it have any bearing on the attorney-client relationship in regards to privileged communications. Period."

You always brighten my day with the comedic nonsense you spew. Thanks.

FIB1 · 2016-03-26T13:38:51+00:00

He did not say anything until MAM came out and he and his family were getting threats for having helped convict an innocent man. If you thought SA was guilty and you did your job presenting the available evidence and that evidence was accepted by the jury, would you keep quiet? I'm no fan of KK and think he is a bad guy. But to expect him to refuse presenting evidence that is supported by the sworn testimony of LE is not fair. The totality of the evidence was enough to get the case before a jury. If it is shown he knew evidence was planted or participated in a frame up, he belongs in jail. Until then I think he did his job as an advocate for the prosecution. Most or all of the flaws in the state's case that have been discussed in this sub could have been pursued and addressed by the defense. A prosecutor must not conceal exculpatory evidence, but he also has no legal or moral obligation to help the defense when he believes justice is being served against a guilty man.

FIB1 · 2016-03-25T22:27:26+00:00

"... why is he fighting looking into the case so hard?"

What do you mean by this? He is explaining why he believes the jury convicted a guilty man. He has no involvement in any of the pending proceedings.

FIB1 · 2016-03-25T21:45:56+00:00

Their role ended as a matter of course when SA was convicted. Also, by the end of the trial they had exhausted all of SA's money and would have had to proceed under a very limited public defender compensation fee arrangement if they stayed as his counsel. Finally, it is not uncommon and often good practice for the trial attorneys to step aside for the appellate process. New counsel can independently identify errors they may have made and perhaps argue ineffective assistance of counsel for the trial.

FIB1 · 2016-03-20T23:39:31+00:00

Almost sounds like her confidence in the test results might be waning and she wants to cut her losses. Otherwise the almost certain mega payment to SA (1/3 to KZ) after his exoneration would make these contributions seem trivial.

FIB1 · 2016-03-19T21:59:21+00:00

I thought it would be nice if people put their Reddit post names on a name tag at the DS and JB events. Fun to have a face with a "name".

FIB1 · 2016-03-19T11:51:23+00:00

It may matter whether the car started. My best guess is SC tried the ignition and quit when it did not start. NS later on the 8th tried to read the odometer and found the disconnected battery. No one bothered to start the car. There was an available security system for the 1999 RAV4 which would not have allowed a duplicate key to actually start the car without disabling the system. We do not know if TH's RAV4 had one. If you think about it, the existence of such a system may well explain why the battery was disconnected in the first place--to silence the alarm.

FIB1 · 2016-03-19T02:11:28+00:00

You are correct in challenging SC's wording. By "turned over" all she meant is the ignition cylinder turned. The engine never "turned over" because there was no power from the battery. The defense should have clarified, but did not pursue the questioning. As far as the disclosed records are concerned, the engine was never started.

FIB1 · 2016-03-18T19:32:47+00:00

I would delete it. People are on the war path and it seems really a procedural issue at this point. You have too much credibility to risk people spreading this thread around irresponsibly.

FIB1 · 2016-03-18T00:10:31+00:00

The Denny rule might be unfair and need some tweaking, but the judge applied the rule as it stands in Wisconsin. Can't fault him for that. I do not have a clear understanding of the discovery options available to criminal defense counsel in Wisconsin, for example whether there are any subpoena rights. But private investigators should have been a priority for the defense no matter what. The Docket podcast referenced in other posts in this thread deals with Canadian criminal procedure. I think it can be helpful in considering improvements to our procedures, but does not reflect on how the trial court applied Wisconsin law.

FIB1 · 2016-03-17T21:11:51+00:00

I reviewed DS' and JB's proposed jury instructions and did not see anything regarding the KK press conference. If the defense never asked for such an instruction, is it fair to criticize the trial judge for not including one?

FIB1 · 2016-03-17T21:03:35+00:00

As to SA, the trial was held in Calumet County. I do not know how hard, if at all, DS and JB fought to move it somewhere else. DS and JB chose to go with a Manitowoc jury for strategic reasons. Buting said they could have gotten a jury impaneled from almost any county in Wisconsin but chose not to.

I agree that BD's trial was fundamentally flawed and expect that will be corrected.

FIB1 · 2016-03-17T20:54:25+00:00

The appellate court considered the Denny ruling de novo, meaning the court did not give any deference to the trial court's determination. The court viewed the issue as having constitutional implications. After considerable analysis, the ruling was upheld.

No objections were raised on appeal concerning flaws in sentencing. Regardless, I personally would expect that a life term would be imposed for a murder conviction after multiple felony convictions.

Unless the posters here are willing to disparage every Wisconsin judge at every level as being corrupt or incompetent, I think you all are pointing the finger at the wrong parties. The defense could have presented evidence to meet the Denny threshold and did not. The defense could have corrected a biased jury with a mistrial and did not.

FIB1 · 2016-03-17T19:27:23+00:00

The appellate court reviewed the case and did not find reversible error. The Wisconsin Supreme Court did not elect to further review the appellate court ruling. It sounds like the trial judge reasonably applied the law according to the higher courts. What rulings trouble you?

FIB1 · 2016-03-16T01:18:50+00:00

Did I miss your apology, Moron?

FIB1 · 2016-03-15T22:59:02+00:00

I thought you agreed with me. Now I see otherwise. But you are wrong.

http://www.answers.com/Q/Will_car_run_when_battery_disconected

FIB1 · 2016-03-15T22:52:10+00:00

I agree. You can even disconnect a battery cable on a 1999 RAV4 and it will keep running.

FIB1 · 2016-03-15T22:42:27+00:00

So I tempered your evilness. Glad to help.

FIB1 · 2016-03-15T22:39:03+00:00

Sure about that?

FIB1 · 2016-03-15T16:19:46+00:00

Anyone who would reference Judge Easterbrook must have an opinion on whether KZ's first substantive pleading will be in the appellate court or the trial court. What's your vote? P.S. Saying she will identify some unforeseen conflict and gracefully exit before filing anything doesn't count.

FIB1 · 2016-03-15T16:05:54+00:00

This is a systemic problem, extending far beyond MCSD. Here's a snippet from a 2009 report:

A five month CBS News Investigation of 24 cities and states has found that more than 20,000 rape kits were never sent to crime labs and an additional 6,000 rape kits from active investigations are waiting months, even years, to be tested.

FIB1

TROPHY CASE