Thursday, May 14, 2009

Read it Witch

You make a mess, you clean it up. It's one of the cardinal rules of life.
The number of points that can be made from the various articles at the San Angelo Standard-Times yesterday and today are large, but this is a big one:
"During the hearing, (Gerald) Goldstein gave (Barbara) Walther two large notebooks filled with information. Walther later asked Goldstein how long it would take to pare down the notebooks to what she called 'the specifics'."
If you drove a truck drunkenly into someone's living room, and say, Judge Walther had sentenced you as part of your punishment to clean up the mess, I would say this is the rough equivalent to what is going on here. Barbara (who I often refer to as "Athaliah," usurper Queen of Judah), made this mess. For her to say that the notebook should be "par(ed) down" to "the specifics" indicates several things. One is, that she has already ruled on this in her mind, and is just sitting in to edit her decision to make it appear that she responded to the "facts." That we talked about yesterday. The judicial diva of San Angelo was quoted as saying; "Not a lot of evidence has been presented, There have been a lot of speeches this morning." She rattles off disparaging one liners in the morning to telegraph that she is essentially part of the prosecution, and not a judge. Then she is then confronted with the facts in the afternoon. Point one, she's made her decision. Point two? The lazy usurper witch responds to "Gerry" Goldstein's by acting like a Prima Donna complaining "Could you pare it down a little?"

Barbara, you asked for it by playing comedian to the press and spouting off about speeches. Well, here's your evidence, and now you don't want to read it? Call a recess if you want. Find a nice shade tree, get out your cigars and sippin' whiskey but READ IT. I can only be glad that she sets herself up so obviously and publically for a reveresal later. Her intent is clearly stated in the morning, and her lazy judicial partisanship is further underscored in the afternoon. Read the notebooks Athaliah, THEY ARE THE SPECIFICS.

Having all the children returned to their parents proves there was no probable cause in the first place IMHO. With over 400 children taken and a whole community sacked for evidence, there are going to be a lot of "specifics." Deal with it. She owes that to the defendants. She owes that to Schleicher County before putting them through the expense of the trials and the inevitable bank busting appeals. A lot of work now may turn out to be relatively small work compared to the bigger mess to clean up later.

This is the "trial" of the evidence. There are a lot of people waiting hopefully in the wings to see this handled properly. Judge Steven Conn continues to send little messages to "get this right" by supplying Walther with all the witnesses he can provide. Even showing faith in that witness, the convicted sex criminal that was supposedly at the ranch that day.
"(Yesterday Dale) Barlow appeared before Mohave County Superior Court Judge Steve Conn in Kingman, Ariz. Barlow told the court he had no objection and would cooperate with the subpoena to appear as a witness in the Texas suppression hearing at the Tom Green County courthouse."
Unlike Texas who have obstructed every appearance of witnesses in Arizona, and co-opted Matt Smitt to plead that YFZ evidence is not relevant and have argued the points of Texas actively before Judge Conn, Judge Conn has facilitated the Texas inquest into the evidence, granting Dale leave to travel to San Angelo. It is an arduous task for Dale as well.
"Barlow’s trip to Texas was likely an exhausting odyssey. He made a five-hour drive to his Mohave County Superior Court appearance Tuesday, then had to drive two hours to Las Vegas, Nev., where he was to catch a flight to Dallas, then to San Angelo."
Further proof that it is a trial of the evidence that "Athaliah" must conduct, or someone else will have to is provided by the unfriendly prosecutor Matt Smith, who provides us with this clear eyed and honest assessment.
"Smith said the question will be moot if the suppression motion is granted in Texas.

Otherwise, Smith said, litigation of the suppression matter will be the next significant event in Arizona pretrial proceedings for Jeffs."
Well Bravo Matt, after acting like a toadie for Texas, he tells it the way it is. That's a refreshing change from doctrinaire Texas prosecutors and anti FLDS bloggers who crow insistently like every decision handed down from judicial partisans amount to certainty, finality and truth. If Texas will not try the evidence, Arizona will have to. In fact, Matt is saying in code that unless Texas rules the right way (against the evidence), he's going to have to participate in a trial to determine that in Arizona. Matt will believe that the evidence is inadmissible if Texas says so, Matt will also not believe it is admissible if Texas says so. Matt is also admitting in coded language again, that he has every intention of using that evidence, if it's available to him. Thanks again Matt, that's about as much as we can expect from the opposition. After that breath of fresh air, it's back to the hubris of Texas.
"Assistant Attorney General Eric Nichols said the defendants’ claim of omissions didn’t meet the burden of proof for suppressing evidence. There was probable cause to believe a 16-year-old girl was being held on the ranch and being abused, he said.

The caller gave details about her situation and living details of the ranch that officers knew to be true, he said.

“None of these claims of omission would affect the underlying probable cause to issue the search warrant,” he said.

He added later: 'We feel very confident in our position the defendants did not satisfy any' of the burden of proof to suppress."
Matt Smith gives lie to all of this. Again, the only acceptable outcome to Arizona is exclusion. Otherwise they are compelled to see for themselves. I'm getting the impression that Matt is tired of this.

Despite the fact that legally it is difficult to transfer Arizona's exclusion of the evidence back to Texas after they have ruled it acceptable, it will eventually wind it's way back to a Texas court. Before, or after the trials of the FLDS men.


Sphere: Related Content

4 comments:

TxBluesMan said...

FLDS Lawyers Try To Pull a Fast One...

ztgstmv said...

"Assistant Attorney General Eric Nichols said the defendants’ claim of omissions didn’t meet the burden of proof for suppressing evidence. Said with tongue in cheek!

The warrant was pure lies, and there was evidence to prove it: the false hospital story, Dale's name provided to the caller..., everything about this call screamed HOAX. But boy did they want to believe in it, even if they had to suspend due dilligence and objectivity.

If Walther doesn't rule to suppress, some higher court will; if nothing else the sheer remifications of such precedent will engender political forces to influence the appellates to suppress.

Carol said...

I am waiting to hear how Flora knew the wrong name was on the warrant!
Why has not she and R been subpoenaed?

The Pharisee said...

I have decided to post TxBluesMan's comment linking to his blog. Though it doesn't seem to have been a factor, he seems to have been roughly correct about a picture being in evidence that shouldn't have been.

I have no idea of the circumstances and always take Blues' with a large grain of salt. Nevertheless it is unfair to complain that when I break news and no one pays attention to it, to turn around and ignore that which the opposition breaks. His story hasn't been refuted, and the picture, if in evidence, was clearly not from YFZ.