It's on, in Arizona

The next stage in the evidence fight will not be an appeal in Texas (though that may certainly come soon) but a straight ahead assault in Arizona:

"In previous proceedings before this Court, counsel fo Mr. Jeffs expressed misgivings about the ability to obtain a full and fair hearing concerning the Texas raid in the Texas courts. Those misgivings have now been borne out as the Texas judge who authorized the issuance fo the warrant, District Judge Barbara Walther, has, not surprisingly, now affirmed herself and affirmed the validity of the search conducted under the warrant."

Read the request for evidentiary hearing. Warren Jeffs' attorney Michael Piccarreta goes on to say:

"Notably, the district court's order does not contain any factual findings about the false information set forth in the affidavits in support of the warrant, i.e. that the purported caller did not exist and her alleged abuser was not there and had not been in Texas in decades."

He further states that Texas relied on the affirmation of Brooks Long that he sincerely believed the caller existed, as that caller described them self This argument, he claims is circular because it's self evident on the basis of the affidavit, that the affiant believes what they are saying.

Piccarreta cannot resist applause lines and goes for them frequently. This one I really like:

"An investigator of the level of Barney Fife would have recognized the call as a hoax if he had spent an hour or two of proper investigation."

Warren's attorneys also go after Elissa Wall in a separate motion and the absolutely surreal action of the court to redact the motion, removing the name of a published author, because she was a minor at the time, gives the head quite a spin.

Sphere: Related Content