Early lunch break
Judge Cayer is going to allow SBI agent Jenny Elwell to testify about the blood test done with phenolphthalein - a chemical that can detect blood. She cannot testify about blood tested with luminol - another chemical test - because Cayer felt the testimony this morning showed luminol was not as a relable test as phenolphthalein. There were two samples that another SBI agent tested. That agent wasn't able to come today because she's on medical leave until the end of the week. Cayer is allowing Elwell to testify about the other agents testing since Elwell is that agent's supervisor. Elwell can testify about DNA test, but she can not give her opinion on the DNA test. Cayer said he felt the information about peaks in DNA would confuse the jurors, very understandable. I'm confused how to even pronounce phenolphthalein.
Elwell will testify to all this in front of the jurors at 2. Cayer is allowing to break up Stafford's testimony (who was on the stand Friday afternoon) because Elwell is on vacation this week and would have to travel back down here from Virgina. So, this afternoon Elwell will retake the stand, this time with the jury here. I wouldn't think she'd take the whole afternoon; although, any thing is possible. We might see Stafford back on the stand this afternoon. If not, sometime tomorrow morning.
Elwell will testify to all this in front of the jurors at 2. Cayer is allowing to break up Stafford's testimony (who was on the stand Friday afternoon) because Elwell is on vacation this week and would have to travel back down here from Virgina. So, this afternoon Elwell will retake the stand, this time with the jury here. I wouldn't think she'd take the whole afternoon; although, any thing is possible. We might see Stafford back on the stand this afternoon. If not, sometime tomorrow morning.
posted by THE HICKORY DAILY RECORD at at
12:13 PM
16 Comments:
I would like to see Stafford back on the stand. For me, there is a huge unanswered question about the phone call:
I feel like Stafford isn't giving out all the information. He obviously has contacted the phone company which is how he knows there were two calls from Dallas which lasted 5 seconds and 1 minute 53 seconds. BUT HE HAS NO IDEA FROM WHAT PHONE NUMBER THOSE CALLS ORIGINATED?
I don't believe that for a second. How can the phone company know exactly the duration of the calls, but not where they came from?
Maybe he doesn't want to admit they came from a payphone, or maybe they came from a disposable phone, or a stolen phone. Whatever it is, he should be forced to tell.
In this age of computers, I don't believe for a moment he can know the city and duration of the calls, but not what phone number they came from. That is just not possible. I feel he is trying to cover something up.
After lunch I suggest the prosecution should get Maj. Stafford back on the stand as soon as possible and ask him why so many things (evidence)in this case was not sent for testing and does he have any concrete evidence linking the defendant to this crime. If he answers I do not why and no I don't then I would suggest the state dismiss the charges now to keep the case from the jury and risk a not gulity finding by the jury since that would allow double jeopardy to come into play and Jerry could never be charged with this crime again. Somebody better wake up. Even if they have the right man I do not think they have proved it yet. If I was on the jury I could not vote to convict him based on what has been presented so far. No way!
Too late to avoid double jeopardy - jeopardy attaches when the jury is sworn or the first witness is sworn, whichever happens first.
julius--i stand corrected and thanks for the update--I looked back at several case studies and most said when the jury is seated then double jeopardy is in effect. If being heard by a judge only then when the first witness is sworn--Is that correct?
so either way you look at it.. double jeopardy will apply. I hope that all voters will remember this when Mr. Gaither is up for re-election. Someone should take the fall for this circus.. he's the logical clown.
Ret-investigator:
What you stated about jeopardy is correct. It's too late for the state to turn back now....but it is not too late for Judge Cayer to take charge and dismiss the charges against Jerry Anderson.
If Judge Cayer dismisses these charges can the state bring them up if new evidence is found?
jm--must be a slow day for you or they are still at lunch--3:34PM no updates.
James.. from the postings on this thread.. it appears that at this point.. Jerry cannot be charged with this murder again if charges are dropped. Unless the prosecution comes up with something substantial.. Jerry is going to walk.
Anderson cannot be charged with first degree murder or the lesser included charges of second degree or manslaughter. The elected DA has a staff of 40 assistant DA's, legal assistants and investigators and every member of the law enforcement community in this state from the local county sheriff to the FBI at their disposal. The state is charged with the duty of having their ducks in a row before arresting and charging suspects and depriving a person of their freedoms. It is not unusual at all for a grand jury to "rubber stamp" indictments with the belief that law enforcement does not arrest innocent people or if a person is arrested they must have committed a crime. A wise, old Superior Court judge once referred to a situation like the Anderson case as "prosecutorial sentencing", meaning Jerry Anderson has not been convicted of anything and yet he has been incarcerated for more than a year and a half. Our system, while not always perfect, does work - jurors are not only reasonable but work very hard to find the truth in a case.
I think this is a wonderful system we have, it is better for one guilty person to go free that one innocent person to be convicted.
I agree that our legal system works.. if fact I believe it to be among the best in the world. However, the system is only as strong as it's proverbial weakest link. What concerns me most is that neither Emily nor Jerry are getting a fair shake here, just because the egos involved in law enforcement have barely lifted a finger in investigating this case. The "in-your-face" evidence that hasn't been collected, tested, or explained is proof that in this instance.. the system has failed.
julius--i would agree with you to a certain extent about the "rubber stamping" that goes on in a grand jury room. However, in the case of getting a true bill in a capital murder I would hope even in Caldwell County there would be more real evidence presented than what we have seen / heard so far. I can tell you I would have had more hard evidence than what we have seen / heard so far in this case before making the initial arrest. Maybe there is more to come but the state has put on 37 witnesses and they sure as hell have not shown me that Jerry is guilty or anything that would warrant his arrest to start with. I think the Sheriff's Office jumped to quick to appease the public and it has backfired on them.
Don't forget that last year was an election year for Sheriff in Caldwell County. What better way to seal a re-election than to "take a killer off the streets"! Did the incumbant sheriff push too hard for an indictment and arrest? Maybe. Unfortunately the only one who can answer that question for us isn't talking.
ret-investigator:
As you know the grand jury process is not like a regular jury where all jurors must agree unanimously - for so long as 12 out of 18 vote for an indictment to issue, then a true bill is issued and a person is arrested - rightly or wrongly. I do agree that Caldwell County and the DA seem to be making a huge mess of this trial. Never have I seen so many witnesses testifying and retestifying on direct examination. Evidently, the DA's witness coordinators did nothing to prepare for their own witnesses' testimony. Never have I heard of so many people suffering from suppressed memories that seem to recover only after they leave the witness stand. I think the state would have faired better had they called the beer-drinking canine to the stand!
julius--i have appeared before several grand juries and you are correct they all do not have to agree to get a true bill. In your opinion do you think if this case went to the sitting jury in the courtroom today would they return a guilty verdict on what they been presented with so far? I think the state for the lack of hard evidence has taken every occassion it can to get witnesses during testimony to show the pictures of the victim as much as possible. The reason is to pull on the heart strings of the jurors in hopes to sway them if any in-decision enters in to play during deliberations. The sad thing about all this is that we have a person who was killed and we could be possibly back to square one if Jerry walks.
Post a Comment
<< Home