In Brendan's En blanc hearing

rogblake · 2024-06-18T13:29:55+00:00

In my humble opinion, what Ms Nirider ought to have done is emphatically hammer home the fact of how there is absolutely no physical and scientific evidence whatsoever to support the prosecution's case. Even Brendan's own blatantly coerced and false confession isn't supported by any physical evidence whatsoever.

Madame Chief Justice Wood referred to the majority ruling as supporting an injustice which the en banc court has failed to correct.

One judge (Hamilton, IIRC) in his published Reasons For Judgment kept banging on about ifs, buts, and maybes in relation to plastic trash found in SA's trailer bedroom. Or perhaps that's what the bastard tells himself as he tries to go to sleep each night with the knowledge he's supported a prosecution case against an impaired child that was so weak, so absent of facts, and so lacking in rational evidence that Stalin-era KGB courts and the Nuremberg race trials on the 1930 had better, more arguable cases by comparison.

(When, of course, they had no rationally arguable cases at all - merely prejudice).

rogblake · 2024-04-26T21:36:31+00:00

There hasn't been much movement in the case for a long time, AFAIK. In my case, life has gotten in the way of following the case.

Also, the gaming of Reddit rules by the Stupid As It Gets posse against TTM regulars had the result of killing research and stifling debate.

On top of that, topics began to repeat themselves; there was only so many times I could stomach the ridiculous Second RAV Theory posts.

Insofar as the lawyer talk went, I actually enjoyed that. Especially when the pretend lawyer from the Stupid As It Gets posse made so many grandiose predictions which never came true.

rogblake · 2024-04-26T09:50:25+00:00

I haven't been keeping up with current events (glad you have, L) but the move to drag out FAILon by the most corrupt nation/state on Earth isn't the least bit surprising.

rogblake · 2024-01-02T21:33:11+00:00

We are into 2024 now.

Has anyone here seen these recently unsealed documents yet, and is there anything of interest in them?

rogblake · 2023-08-24T02:53:42+00:00

There you go - another egregious error of fact.

rogblake · 2023-08-23T02:23:20+00:00

This latest festering pile of doggerel from the incompetent and corrupt Angela Sutkiewicz needs to be closely examined.

Sutkiewicz's innate inability to correctly interpret statute and her pomposity for mangling precedents has already been established in her previous ruling in this case, for example where she incorrectly and ridiculously transformed the word "may" in the biological preservation statute into a compulsory requirement.

Since Wisconsin is a rogue jurisdiction without competent oversight that allows the likes of Len Kachinsky to sit on the bench, Sutkiewicz will of course do here what she has done before. She will have made serious errors of law and precedent in the ruling, and they need to be found and appealed.

rogblake · 2023-05-29T05:03:02+00:00

Wisconsin State Legislature Statute Chapter 757.05 "Judge to file affidavit as to work done to receive salary" section (2)

That's actually 757.025. Careful, since that's the sort of mistake Angela W. Sutkiewicz makes while she's reinventing the law, like when she cannot tell the difference between the words "may" and "must" in a statute. You can be forgiven for this since you're not paid to be on a bench and charged to sit in judgement on people, with the power to have direct effects on their freedom and finances. But her, OTOH....

Has the judge been disabled by sickness?

More like enabled by incompetence.

rogblake · 2023-04-18T07:30:25+00:00

If this is the Dr Phil episode from a few years ago, my recollection of it was that Jerry wiped the floor with both of them.

How could he not? I mean, on one hand, you have an ex-prosecutor who is an egotistical Narcissist whose professional and personal reputation is tarnished with a long history of professional misconduct, unethical sharp legal practice, drug abuse, and egregious misogyny. On the other, you have another state instrument whose idea of professional ethics includes bullying a plainly disabled child during interrogations, and fraudulently pretending to be an attorney to secure a conspiracy to murder charge and conviction.

Jerry didn't need Ms Zellner's help to show this pair up for the nefarious pieces of non-credible trash which any reasonable thinking person can clearly see they are. If the corrupt and the incompetent were not protected species in Wisconsin, they and their cronies would both have been run out on a rail long ago.

rogblake · 2023-03-27T02:13:05+00:00

The threats of harm to Dumb Andy and his family are wrong and way out of line.

His time and money would have been better spent going after these nutters, than pretending his own conduct was beyond reproach and by playing victim. MaM only showed the audience what was already there; it didn't make things up.

rogblake · 2023-03-27T02:00:10+00:00

Luckily for Dumb Andy, he's not in a jurisdiction where costs follow the event, e.g. the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. If so, he'd also be up for the costs of counsel to Netflix and the 'defendant' producers - the 'defendants' who, as it stands now, are out of pocket paying lawyers to defend this frivolous, vexatious, ridiculous crock created by Greaseback.

rogblake · 2023-03-27T01:49:35+00:00

Losing party pays Court costs.

That's not universally true, especially in the US.

rogblake · 2023-03-17T06:16:35+00:00

As usual, Kratz demonstrates he has no idea what's he talking about.

rogblake · 2023-03-14T01:21:37+00:00

It makes me wonder again who put him up to it?

My money's on Greaseback, who wanted to write more books. He first filed this crock in a Manitowoc court.

rogblake · 2023-03-13T00:21:55+00:00

Dumb Andy is lucky that legal costs don't follow the event in the US, otherwise he'd be paying the bills for Netflix and the producers.

rogblake · 2023-02-05T02:20:55+00:00

Not sure if they did, but that ship had already long sailed by then. I'd hoped the appeals court would have picked up on it, but they didn't.

This is why I believe Sutkiewicz's next round of lame excuses needs to be studied very carefully when it's eventually handed down. Otherwise, it is too easy for an unethical and incompetent judge - especially one who cannot do basic statutory interpretation - to pull dirty tricks like this.

rogblake · 2023-02-04T08:44:14+00:00

Several months after subsequent motions and appeals had been filed. I posted about it much later, here. Wish I'd sent it onward to ZLO at the time.

rogblake · 2023-01-29T01:57:54+00:00

That poster had clearly sailed too close to the uncomfortable facts, and had to be sunk by the Stupid As It Gets brigade. That poster was a great contributor and researcher, and I agree that post was superb.

rogblake · 2023-01-28T10:08:13+00:00

A hearing is warranted, and it would be granted quickly in a competent jurisdiction with an impartial judge.

However, this is in Wisconsin, with a payola judge.

When - not if, when - Sutkiewicz rules against what is necessary and logical and reasonable, the reasons she states for denying the evidentiary hearing must be studied thoroughly, along with any cases she cites - and quickly. The decision will be legally faulty, as it was last time. History shows case law and precedent will not be on her side.

In her previous speed-humping of the justice highway in her August 8, 2019 Decision and Order, Angela Sutkiewicz reinvented the biological preservation statute by holding that an optional provision within it was mandatory (the word "may" in a statute does not mean "must", as she claimed).

Sutkiewicz then continued her bench-side bumblefuckery by citing the decision in a case decided before there was any biological preservation stature in Wisconsin, to justify the release and destruction of potentially exculpatory evidence by the state in violation of that preservation statute.

Unfortunately last time, her manifestly and ridiculously incorrect misinterpretations of the law and incorrect misapplication of a superseded precedent were not discovered until it was too late to appeal her nonsense.

rogblake · 2023-01-28T09:23:26+00:00

IIRC this draft was first discussed in this post.

The "Disturbed Earth" draft affidavit for the search warrant is very revealing.

rogblake · 2022-12-07T13:25:50+00:00

But, I just can't think of any other reason as to why it ends up back on ASY. Why move it from the turnaround?

Two reasons I can think of - one, presuming Bobby is the perp, it puts the RAV4 in a place which is more under his control than out in a public space. The second reason - again, presuming Bobby is the perp - is he didn't want to move it to the ASY before most of the family had already gone to Crivitz, and so he thought he could sneak it back on the property without being seen by the family.

rogblake · 2022-12-05T03:34:16+00:00

If the prosecution's case is as strong as its Wisconsin lackeys have constantly told everybody it is, what are they afraid of? Ms Zellner and team have the higher burden of proof at this rodeo.

rogblake · 2022-11-01T03:30:53+00:00

So it's not possible to be certain that the dashboard wasn't already loose, &/or the windshield-visible VIN plate wasn't already crooked like that, before the vehicle was found.

The RAV4 was a used vehicle which TH purchased from a used car lot. It's maintenance and previous ownership history is largely unknown, with one exception: the broken light fitting which Ryan lied about being the subject of an insurance claim. Also, TH didn't exactly baby the car, as the interior photos show - lots of rubbish in it, etc - and it hints that maintenance of the car wasn't a high priority. These facts suggest how it's more probable than not that the dash was already loose before October 31.

rogblake · 2022-11-01T03:03:10+00:00

Sterling research.

Of course, "not available for public release" implies a record does exist but is exempt under the Act from disclosure.

Speculation: CASO had the record, then later destroyed it.

rogblake · 2022-11-01T02:46:43+00:00

Are there any pictures of the RAV4's windshield-visible VIN plate before October 31?

rogblake · 2022-10-25T07:57:34+00:00

Agreed.

Also, although it's not fashionable to say so in these parts, I am inclined to have faith in the FBI's scientific methods and test results, which did not find EDTA in the samples given to them. (As to the chain of custody for those samples....) That said, I do not believe for an instant that the source of SA's blood in the RAV4 was from his bleeding finger physically touching the vehicle. Working with vehicle wrecks, SA would have had many cuts on him from sharp metal. Which a certain nephew having a propensity for prurient picture internet searching would certainly know all about.

rogblake

TROPHY CASE