Whoa, baby!
[I am correcting my spelling of Whoa. Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks to the person who pointed it out.]
Well, there is a slight chance this trial could be over this afternoon, although, I'm not sure if that will happen. Let me explain what just transpired in the last few minutes.
Dee Watson, Emily's sister is on the stand. She was explaining and going through the days of Emily's disappearance and then the discovery of her body. At the funeral in Sawmills, Dee was telling a story that Jerry shared with Dee's son-in-law. Reportedly, now this is Dee's words, Jerry told her son-in-law about a story he (Jerry) heard about a man killing his wife because that man learned his wife was cheating on him. Then, reportedly, and again this is one woman's story, Jerry laughed. Lisa Dubs jumped out of her seat to object. The jurors were excused to discuss the matter without them present.
Dubs said a clear discovery violation just occurred because the defense had never, never heard that story. However, Dawn Tutterow and Eric Bellas also told the judge they hadn't heard that story, either. Dubs said Watson's statement was the most damaging statement made about Jerry and "we had to sit here for the first time and hear it." She asked the jurors be instructed to disregard that statement. However, Dubs said the statement couldn't be undone and this may be grounds for a mistrial - that there was no other option.
Quoting Michelle Tanner (forgive me I'm from that generation), Whoa Baby! A mistrial... That means all this would be over, Jerry would return to jail and we would have to start a trial all over. Wow.
Now, I don't have a lot of experience with this, and for that I apologize. Cayer said he would review discovery laws and make a decision when we return at 2. But before lunch break (and again the jurors are not present for any of this), attorneys began discussing a whole other matter. Now, if Cayer was leaning toward a mistrial, it seems he wouldn't go ahead and bring up another, totally unrelated, matter. But you never know what he'll find or decide over the next hour and a half.
What a morning. I hope there's no mistrial. I want to find out what is going to happen! We'll find out at 2. I'll be back around 3:30 (if no mistrial).
Well, there is a slight chance this trial could be over this afternoon, although, I'm not sure if that will happen. Let me explain what just transpired in the last few minutes.
Dee Watson, Emily's sister is on the stand. She was explaining and going through the days of Emily's disappearance and then the discovery of her body. At the funeral in Sawmills, Dee was telling a story that Jerry shared with Dee's son-in-law. Reportedly, now this is Dee's words, Jerry told her son-in-law about a story he (Jerry) heard about a man killing his wife because that man learned his wife was cheating on him. Then, reportedly, and again this is one woman's story, Jerry laughed. Lisa Dubs jumped out of her seat to object. The jurors were excused to discuss the matter without them present.
Dubs said a clear discovery violation just occurred because the defense had never, never heard that story. However, Dawn Tutterow and Eric Bellas also told the judge they hadn't heard that story, either. Dubs said Watson's statement was the most damaging statement made about Jerry and "we had to sit here for the first time and hear it." She asked the jurors be instructed to disregard that statement. However, Dubs said the statement couldn't be undone and this may be grounds for a mistrial - that there was no other option.
Quoting Michelle Tanner (forgive me I'm from that generation), Whoa Baby! A mistrial... That means all this would be over, Jerry would return to jail and we would have to start a trial all over. Wow.
Now, I don't have a lot of experience with this, and for that I apologize. Cayer said he would review discovery laws and make a decision when we return at 2. But before lunch break (and again the jurors are not present for any of this), attorneys began discussing a whole other matter. Now, if Cayer was leaning toward a mistrial, it seems he wouldn't go ahead and bring up another, totally unrelated, matter. But you never know what he'll find or decide over the next hour and a half.
What a morning. I hope there's no mistrial. I want to find out what is going to happen! We'll find out at 2. I'll be back around 3:30 (if no mistrial).
posted by THE HICKORY DAILY RECORD at at
12:38 PM
11 Comments:
Woah, Baby is correct....things are getting ready to get sticky. I can just see the blonde Lisa Duds standin' (almost falling out of her chair) hollowering "objection".
Why was this not in pre-trial discovery? Surely, someone-prosecution maybe-had to have heard something about this comment-
This could be it folks....just think-your tax dollars hard at work.
I'm like you tinkerbell, I can just picture it, gum chomping and all. It's too bad some cartoonist isn't hanging out at court ready to capture a moment like that.
According to the blog, prosecution hadn't heard that story from Dee either. It blows my mind why it would come out for the first time today though.
Why was the judge allowing Dee to relate an alleged conversation between Jerry and someone else in the first place? That violates the rules of hear-say. Did she blurt it out in 2 seconds? Or was the judge asleep at the wheel?
You are correct Allison (see sometimes I think you are right)This does violate the rule of hear-say (second hand information). And once the jury hears it-they hear it! There is no re-wind suck it from the jurors brain.
Going to be an intersting afternoon
Tink
woah is me.....I love the coverage.since I live in this vicinity this trial has me captivated..I wish I could be there...Correct..hearsay it was and it was meant to be...the prosecution knew it was going to happen I believe....once said it is impossble to erase...damning as it may be,I belive there was no cause for a mistrial...
First of all, "woah" is not a word. "Whoa" is the correct spelling. And I find it mighty concerning that this blog is used as a forum for Full House and toddler, Olsen twin references. This is a capital murder case, ladies and gentlemen, where a man could be put to death for the brutal murder of his wife. In what world do pop culture and cheesy sitcoms fit with coverage of a murder trial?
This is hearsay!!! Why didn't Dee's son-in-law testify?
Aheem...Mr. or Ms. Curious....Your comment is totally off of the wall...Have you no Idea those are nicknames you idiot????..So I take it that your real name is Curious....Your parents should be ashamed for naming you that....Thats all TY
Craig said "Aheem...Mr. or Ms. Curious....Your comment is totally off of the wall..."
I'll second that motion...
B%*#& YOU ARE!!!
does Lisa Dubs chomp gum? Seems to me she's doing a fine job in this trial. I don't think we can say that about the state though.
As sad as it seems...Lisa is actually doing a great job! She has put reasonable doudt into my mind!!
Post a Comment
<< Home