Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

The"official" threads posted during the trial

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
whisper
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 9130
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:00 pm
Contact:

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by whisper » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:05 am

I think there's a hearing today too.

Tiger Lilly
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 3134
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 1:00 pm

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by Tiger Lilly » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:12 am

*groan* You're kidding... I didn't think there was another till the 20-something of Nov. :(

Tiger Lilly
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 3134
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 1:00 pm

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by Tiger Lilly » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:23 am

Bleh... so there is a hearing...
Originally posted by elusive moonwalker on MJJForum
discussion of the dicovery motion sneddon filed to get access to defence evidence. the law is the defence doesnt have to hand anything over until 30 dats b4 trial. also sneddon handing over discovery to the defence is to be discussed.sneddon was supposed to hand over everything on friday just gone. anything that wasnt handed over by then would be ruled inadmissable.

So Sneddon wants to see the defense's cards before the trial so he can twist things around his conspiracy theory. And if Melville plays by the rules (haha yeh right!) anything Sneddon hasn't handed over by today shouldn't be allowed. Another excuse for Melville to show his true colours. :extremely

dangerous
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 2098
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 8:00 am

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by dangerous » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:30 am

was it over the phone that Mez had to keep reminding them that the Sanchez motion was denied? or was that in an actual hearing?

What is the posistion on what the prosecution has handed over, have they handed everything over yet? or will that be addressed today? So everything not received by today will be ruled inadmissable? ya right.

How are they legally attempting to gain access to the defense’s material. They tried to say it was inculpatory and that was denied, so are they basically just asking Melville to let them see it anyways?

oh lawd gadd .. the questions.... soo many questions.. soo many bossses watching.. :throwings
[align=center]Image[/align]

A.Beautiful.Mind
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 1423
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:00 pm

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by A.Beautiful.Mind » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:41 am

Well if the law states that it's only allowed for the Procecuters to recieve the evidence from the defense team into 30 days before the trial.. Then why is he filing a motion, when the obvious answer is going to be NO. Or are we expecting a ruling from Melvelle which will coincidently be in favour of sneddon?
[align=center]

Michael Jackson
[/align]



[align=center]Planet Earth, gentle and blue

With all my heart, I love you.[/align]



[align=center]I LOVE YOU[/align]





[align=center]Justice has Prevailed



http://insideabeautifulmind.blogspot.com/[/align]


Tiger Lilly
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 3134
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 1:00 pm

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by Tiger Lilly » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:44 am

The only way I can see him doing that is by getting some of the evidence deemed inadmissable and he can only do that with things that he's already seen ie Evvy raid evidence.

dangerous
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 2098
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 8:00 am

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by dangerous » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:44 am

Well if the law states that it's only allowed for the Procecuters to recieve the evidence from the defense team into 30 days before the trial..Then why is he filing a motion
He thinks Mez has inculpatory evidence, thats why he filed that Sanchez motion. That motion was denied. so now i have no idea what foundation (in a legal standpoint) they are basing this request over. My guess is taht they motioning for Melville to reconsider?
[align=center]Image[/align]

A.Beautiful.Mind
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 1423
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:00 pm

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by A.Beautiful.Mind » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:47 am

He thinks Mez has inculpatory evidence, thats why he filed that Sanchez motion. That motion was denied. so now i have no idea what foundation (in a legal standpoint) they are basing this request over. My guess is taht they motioning for Melville to reconsider?
Your quess is as good as mine. Thanks for clearing me up on this one Ash. Your a gem :D

~Jamie~
[align=center]

Michael Jackson
[/align]



[align=center]Planet Earth, gentle and blue

With all my heart, I love you.[/align]



[align=center]I LOVE YOU[/align]





[align=center]Justice has Prevailed



http://insideabeautifulmind.blogspot.com/[/align]


User avatar
whisper
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 9130
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:00 pm
Contact:

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by whisper » Mon Nov 08, 2004 10:10 pm

Jennalyn was inside the courtroom today for the hearing

Jennalyn at MJJF
Posted: Nov 8 2004, 08:17 PM



I just got home from the hearing. It lasted from 2-4pm

Mez did show up with Susan Yu as well as a woman representative for Sanger. Sneddon was the only member of prosecution present.

There were no pics cause there was no pool camera present nor any media with cameras. In fact, there were only ~5 media persons in the court room. 5 public/fans as well.

It started around 2pm and they discussed certain items that the two sides couldn't come to an agreement on.

The defense wanted these items compelled to discovery that the prosecution thought were under work-product. These things included emails, correspondences, chronologies (time frame) that the doe family gave in their first testimony (Yu said the defense can show that the Doe Family changed up their story while signed under perjury of law).

It's unclear to me whether or not the defense has a specific official calendar that the family gave for the first round of allegations.

First it seemed like they didn't, then sneddon said they did and have the GJ transcripts of what happened, etc., and then again she said this info can be exculpatory (evidence saying mj didn't do it) and show that the family are indeed liars! I liked that she said stuff like "because they are liars" in court.

After they went through each piece of discovery, saying whether or not it may be admitted or not, they talked about how they will search both MJ's Assistant's and Brad Miller's hard drives'. There are 6 HD's total. The "neutral" man that both sides agreed to on Thurs/Fri to have special masters and decide whether or not the info on the computers is between clint-attorney privilage is Stan Rourden; however, he's only got a couple of days before vacation and melville wasn't sure how long it'd take.

Messereau had great concern that the Sheriff Dept's tech people would deal with taking off any special privilaged files because (not exact quote) "I've asked media where they have got information from and they told me the Sheriff's Department."

Melville agreed to have an outside tech person with a knowledgeable attorney present remove any trace of files that are privilaged, and the prosecution has to pay for it! hah.

Melville said to Sneddon once or twice something like "you got us into this". refering to the Assistant's house search.

Yu said that they need the pieces of evidence from the forensics people right away and sneddon said that the reports are done and the items are ready to be tested by the defense. I guess that the way they were talking, Melville extended the items that will be admissable in court to December 6th, 30 days before the start of trial.

any questions?

mj_fan_for_life31
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:00 pm

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by mj_fan_for_life31 » Mon Nov 08, 2004 10:18 pm

Sneddy's Finally HANDING OVER!?! What a ditwit! The family'f FINALLY being seen as LAIRS!! Thanks whisper! Keep up the great work you are DA BOMB!!!

K.M.A.
Prince Charming :wink


User avatar
whisper
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 9130
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:00 pm
Contact:

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by whisper » Mon Nov 08, 2004 10:46 pm

Jennalyn Posted: Nov 8 2004, 10:37 PM

Q. When you said that Melville extending the date to December for evidence, does this mean that he did not stick to his ruling that whatever the prosecution did not hand over by the beginning of this month would be out?

A. I guess so, but you see I wasn't in the last court hearings on thurs/fri or the one before that so I'm really not sure of what went on and how rigid the rules were about the cut off date. From what I read in the press, like everyone else did, the cut off was Friday. That confused me.
Melville kept refering to "30 days before trial" which would be Dec 6th. Is there a typical "30 days before trial" date that most trials get stuff in by?


Q. Also, did Melville rule about the first issue in which the defense wanted about the family's first testimony (emails, correspondence, etc.), which Sneddon is claiming as work product?

A. I should've been more clear on this one...
the different correspondences, etc, were not necessarily of things the family directly said. I'm sure the defense has anything the family testified about. It's more specific than that...
Ie:
--interoffice/intraoffice memos. Melville: ? dunno ruling?
--unspecified tapes I think relating to the DCPS/DSS (dept social services) that the defense wanted transcripts of. sneddon said they shouldn't be accountable for making transcripts of everything they have. Melville's Ruling: no
--email communications: email communications between I THINK sheriffs, people in the DA's office, detectives, etc. Melville: No.
--all notes of witnesses that they take with them during their testimony. Melville: yes
--correspondence to other agencies Melv - dunno ruling
--list of names of prosecutors that have reviewed the case. melville - no
--prosecution charge evaluation sheets. mel- no.

They argued because sneddon said the demands were "overbroad" and that the defense blended 1054.1 and Brady material. I just know that they both have to do with handing over evidence. Brady refers to items of work-product/privilage having to be handed over if exculpatory.

dangerous
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 2098
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 8:00 am

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by dangerous » Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:19 pm

so he extended the deadline.. go figure.
[align=center]Image[/align]

Tiger Lilly
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 3134
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 1:00 pm

Official Nov 8 2004 Hearing UPDATE#2: Report from courtroom observer

Post by Tiger Lilly » Tue Nov 09, 2004 4:08 am

Originally posted by whisper
Q. Also, did Melville rule about the first issue in which the defense wanted about the family's first testimony (emails, correspondence, etc.), which Sneddon is claiming as work product?

A. I should've been more clear on this one...
the different correspondences, etc, were not necessarily of things the family directly said. I'm sure the defense has anything the family testified about. It's more specific than that...
Ie:
--interoffice/intraoffice memos. Melville: ? dunno ruling?
--unspecified tapes I think relating to the DCPS/DSS (dept social services) that the defense wanted transcripts of. sneddon said they shouldn't be accountable for making transcripts of everything they have. Melville's Ruling: no
--email communications: email communications between I THINK sheriffs, people in the DA's office, detectives, etc. Melville: No.
--all notes of witnesses that they take with them during their testimony. Melville: yes
--correspondence to other agencies Melv - dunno ruling
--list of names of prosecutors that have reviewed the case. melville - no
--prosecution charge evaluation sheets. mel- no.

They argued because sneddon said the demands were "overbroad" and that the defense blended 1054.1 and Brady material. I just know that they both have to do with handing over evidence. Brady refers to items of work-product/privilage having to be handed over if exculpatory.
I really don't understand this... Who's Melville saying no to? Mez or Sneddon?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest