Advertisements
 

The Motion Ruling I Promised You I Would Fix.

January 16, 2015

 

 

Don’t act surprised, we all knew I couldn’t help myself.

Disclaimer:  I AM NOT REALLY A JUDGE. I AM AWARE I AM NOT A JUDGE AND I AM IN NO WAY SERIOUSLY INTENDING FOR ANYONE TO BELIEVE THAT I AM A JUDGE. I JUST PLAY ONE ON MY BLOG.  ALSO, I TOTALLY JACKED THIS SIXTEEN ITEM MOTIONS JUDGEMENT FROM JEFF GOLD AND CHANGED IT TO HOW IT,IN MY OPINION SHOULD READ. BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT YOU DO WHEN YOU JACK SOMEONE’S STUFF HERE IS THE LINK TO THE REAL DOCUMENT. http://www.thegoldpatrol.com/

SUPERIOR COURT OF KELLY

DISTRICT OF JUAN COUNTY

CLERK OF THE COURT-STABBY’S PENCIL

HON. RBMD

STATE OF FUCKED UP JURISTS and JUAN M MARTINEZ

v.

STABBY ANAL EINSTEIN(001) ALFRED E. NURMI

JENNY FROM THE CELL BLOCK    CHA CHA DE LA HOSA (UNDERBOSS)

RULING

The Court has considered the defendant’s  COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS AND FRIVILOUS Motion to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life (WHATEVER THE FUCK THAT EVEN MEANS) filed September 26, 2014 (with attachments BECAUSE WHY NOT), the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to being whiny bitches October 1, 2014, the State’s Objection to Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life filed October 6, 2014, the State’s Objection to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Notice to Intent to Seek Death Penalty Due to Continue State Misconduct filed October 10, 2014, Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to still being whiny bitches Supplement #1 filed October 24, 2014, the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss All Charges with Prejudice and/or in the Alternative to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty BECAUSE THAT SOUNDED REALLY FUCKING COOL WHEN ALFRED E. NURMI THOUGHT OF IT AND HE HAD A BLANK MOTION FORM HANDY both filed on November 10, 2014, the State’s Motion for Discover (Compaq Presario Computer)filed November 13, 2014, the State’s Motion for Sanctions (Compaq Presario Computer) filed November 16, 2014, the State’s Motion to Strike (Compaq Presario Computer) filed November 18, 2014, the State’s Objection to Defendant’s  Motion to Dismiss All Charges with Prejudice and/or in the Alternative to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty because it sounded really fucking cool and a bunch of other horseshit that doesn’t matter anyway(NOTE TO SELF, FIND OUT IF NURMI THINKS HE IS GETTING PAID BY THE PAGE.) filed November 20, 2014, the Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration: Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life(SERIOUSLY DOES ANYONE EVEN KNOW IF THAT IS A THING) filed November 26, 2014, Objection to Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration: Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life filed December 1, 2014, YOU KNOW WHAT, LETS JUST MAKE THIS A LOT EASIER FOR EVERYONE READING AND SAY WE ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH A BUNCH OF STUPID TIME WASTING MOTIONS THAT I CAN ONLY ASSUME COME TO ONE OF THE 4 IDIOTS OF THE APOCALYPSE IN THIER DREAMS AND ANSWERS FROM THE STATE TO SAID MOTIONS.

Prosecutorial misconduct is not merely the result of legal error, negligence, mistake, or insignificant impropriety, but, taken as a whole, amounts to intentional conduct which the prosecutor knows to be improper and prejudicial. State v. Aguilar, 217 Ariz. 235, 172 P.3d 423 (App. 2007). To prove prosecutorial misconduct, the proponent must show : (1) the State’s action was improper; and (2) a reasonable likelihood exists that the misconduct could have affected the jury’s verdict, thereby denying the defendant a fair trial. State v. Ramos, 235 Ariz. 230, 330 P.3d 987 (App. 2014); State v. Montano, 204 Ariz. 413, 65 P.3d 61 (2003); State v.Atwood, 171 Ariz. 576, 832 P.2d 593 (1992). To prevail upon a claim of prosecutorial misconduct, a defendant must demonstrate that the prosecutor’s misconduct so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process. Prosecutorial misconduct sufficient to justify reversal must be so pronounced and persistent that it permeates the entire atmosphere of the trial. State v. Edmisten, 220 Ariz. 517, 207 P.3d 770 (2009). There is a distinction between simple prosecutorial error and misconduct that is so egregious that it raises concerns over the integrity and fundamental fairness of the trial. AND ONE THAT ANY FIRST YEAR LAW STUDENT SHOULD PROBABLY KNOW State v. Minnitt, 203 Ariz. 431, 438, 55 P.3d774 (2002); Pool v. Superior Court, 139 Ariz. 98, 105, 677 P.2d 261, 268 (1984). Conduct is egregious when the material at issue was highly significant to the primary jury issue with the potential to have an important effect on the jury’s determination. Donnelly v.DeChristoforo, 416 U.S. 637, 647 (1974). The prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to others acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police. It is the duty of the State as a whole to conduct prosecutions honorably and in compliance with the law. Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 437 (1995). The trial judge is in the best position to determine the atmosphere of the trial, the circumstances surrounding the incident, the manner in which any objectionable statement was made, and its possible effect on the jury and trial. Statev. Nelson, 229 Ariz. 180, 273 P.3d 632 (2012): State v. Koch, 138 Ariz. 99, 673 P.2d 297 (1983). The prosecutor has wide discretion in deciding whether to seek the death penalty. Allowing prosecutors the discretion to seek the death penalty is constitutional. State v. Roque, 213 Ariz. 193, 226, 141 P.3d 368 (2006); State v. Spears, 184 Ariz. 277, 291, 908 P.2d 1062(1996).

Each BULLSHIT allegation of prosecutorial misconduct claimed by Defendant STABBY ANAL EINSTEIN will be discussed below AND WE WILL FIND OUT EXACTLY HOW EINSTEIN-Y SHE IS.

1. Potential mitigation witnesses will not testify. Defendant claims possible(PLEASE NOTE THE WORDS POTENTIAL AND POSSIBLE, THEY ARE KIND OF IMPORTANT. JUST SAYIN’) mitigation witnesses will not speak with defense counsel and others will not testify at the penalty phase retrial for fear of reprisal and/or “cyberbullying”. Defendant provided PROBABLY FORGED AND OR COERCED affidavits to support her claim in the attachments to the Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life(WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT IT JUST SOUNDS WRONG) filed under seal(BECAUSE THE DEFENSE ARE A BUNCH OF BIG FAT PUSSIES)  on September 26, 2014. In addition, the Court has reviewed the information provided in the sealed supplements filed on January 5, 2015 and January 7, 2015. In the defendant’s motion to reconsider filed November 26, 2014, Defendant STABBY ANAL EINSTEIN argues the decision made by the Court of Appeals on the special action has inhibited her ability to present a complete defense of her life since potential defense witnesses cannot testify in sealed proceedings. This Court disagrees BECAUSE  WE HAVE A FUNCTIONING FRONTAL LOBE. The ruling issued by the Court of Appeals does not address the testimony of any witness other than the defendant.  There are many ways to address the concerns expressed by these potential witnesses.

For example, it is possible that testimony of a potential defense witness could be provided through the testimony of another witness. (See A.R.S. § 13751(C), which provides the prosecution or defendant may present any information that is relevant to any mitigating circumstance regardless of its admissibility under the rules governing Docket Code 019 Form R000A Page 3

the admissibility of evidence in criminal trials.) In fact, that has occurred during the penalty phase retrial. During the testimony of the defense expert witnesses, Dr.SEXPERT and Dr. Robert GOOFY, the defendant elicited information obtained from some of the witnesses listed in the Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life, filed under seal on September 26, 2014. Other options are available if a witness is reluctant or refuses to appear and testify. Defendant could subpoena a witness to appear in court. See A.R.S. § 134071(A)(D). The name of a witness could be sealed to protect the privacy interests of that witness. Defendant could present information from potential witnesses through the mitigation specialist.(THIS IS TOTALLY THE ONE I SAY WE GO WITH JUST BECAUSE IT WOULD BE FUNNY TO WATCH MR MARTINEZ RIP APART CHA CHA.)  The testimony of witnesses who testified at the first trial could be provided to the penalty phase jury through transcripts or the video recording made by the court’s For the Record (FTR) system. Alternatively, affidavits and videotaped statements of a witness could be presented to the penalty phase retrial jury.  The Court finds the defendant has failed to establish any misconduct by the State throughout the course of these proceedings(BECAUSE THERE WAS NONE) that has impaired or hindered the defendant’s ability to present mitigating evidence and/or prove mitigating factors pursuant to A.R.S. § 13751(C). The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED

2. Text messages were not timely disclosed. The State provided text messages sent or received OR JUST MADE UP by the victim in October 2010 after initially indicating to the defendant that these text messages were not available DUE TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY. Defendant argues there was exculpatory content within these electronic messages which was contrary to the testimony of Detective Flores at a hearing conducted in June 2010. As noted in the defendant’s motion filed October 1, 2014, many of the victim’s text messages and emails were admitted in evidence during the first trial. The defendant has reviewed many of the victim’s emails, text messages and gmail messages in great detail with her expert witnesses during the penalty phase retrial(MOSTLY BECAUSE SHE GOT SUCH A HUGE BUZZ OUT OF THE ONES SHE JUST MADE UP). Defendant has failed to establish the failure to provide the victim’s electronic messages earlier than October 2010 was for any reason other than the messages were not available due to technological issues. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED

3. Defendant’s rights were violated by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. (REALLY? I HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS SHIT TOO? FINE!) Specifically, Defendant alleges three incidents support her claim. First, Defendant alleges her jail cell was searched(LIKE OMG THEY ACTUALLY SEARCH PEOPLE WHO ARE IN JAIL FOR CONTRABAND AND WEAPONS? I’M TOTALLY SHOCKED BY THIS BIT OF INFORMATION) by jail personnel in February 2014. Second, in February 2014, the mitigation specialist was denied entrance to the jail after SMUGGLING the defendant’s drawings with her after a jail visit. Jail personnel deemed the  drawings to be contraband. Finally, in May 2014, a legal document (a photocopy of a book) was taken from the defendant’s cell during a jail search. Defendant “suspects” the book was copied and provided to the prosecutor. These matters were previously addressed by the Court. Defendant cannot show the searches were other than  routine searches conducted as part of security protocols at the jail. Defendant cannot show any prejudice to her case as a result of these jail searches. Defendant failed to provide any evidence to support her allegation that the book taken from her cell was photocopied and/or provided to the prosecutor. With regard to the mitigation specialist, the matter was resolved within a one week period and the mitigation specialist was permitted to resume visits with the defendant(EVEN THOUGH IN MY OPINION THE BITCH SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED ON THE SPOT. STILL THINKING ABOUT IT CHA CHA, WATCH YOUR STEP IN COURT.) See minute entry dated May 27, 2014. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon these claims. (MAN THEY REALLY ARE GETTING DESPERATE AREN’T THEY?) DENIED.

4. Inconsistent testimony was given by Detective Flores regarding the sequence of  injuries sustained by the victim. (IS THIS EVER GOING TO GO AWAY. CHRIST I WANTED TO WATCH TV SOMETIME THIS WEEK, ERR I MEAN)The defendant argues it was prosecutorial misconduct for the prosecutor to elicit testimony from the case agent, Detective Esteban Flores, regarding the sequence of injuries sustained by the victim at the Chronis hearing knowing his testimony was inconsistent with the testimony of the medical examiner. In January 2013, the defendant sought a new probable causing hearing (Chronis hearing) arguing that the testimony of Detective Flores at trial warranted a new probable cause finding on the aggravating factor alleged by the State. The Court denied the request for a new finding of probable cause by minute entry dated January 10, 2013. Defendant filed a special action with the Arizona Court of Appeals.(BECAUSE SHE THINKS SHE IS A SPECIAL LITTLE SNOWFLAKE.) The Court of Appeals declined jurisdiction. During the guilt phase, the defendant cross examined both Detective Flores and the medical examiner about the sequence of wounds and the detective’s testimony at the probable cause hearing in August 2009. During the penalty phase retrial, the defendant examined both Detective Flores and the medical examiner about these issues FOR ABOUT 700 HOURS. SOMEBODY CHECK THAT. . Detective Flores has testified and explained to both juries the reasons for his testimony in August 2009. The medical examiner has testified regarding his expert opinion on the sequence of wounds. It is for the jury to determine the credibility of witnesses. The defendant fully explored and argued her position on the sequence of wounds. The Court finds the defendant has failed to show any State misconduct with regard to Detective Flores’ testimony. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this Claim. DENIED.

5. There was a delay IN JENNY’S WEED DELIVERY…NO WAIT, SOMEBODY READ THAT LAST PART BACK. OK, MY BAD.  in providing STABBY with the mirror image of the hard drive to the victim’s Compaq Presario computer created on June 11, 2008. The victim’s body was discovered in his home on June 9, 2008. The victim’s Compaq Presario laptop computer was found in the office of his home during the search that followed.  Detective Flores touched a key on the computer with a pen which awakened it from sleep mode. The computer was impounded as evidence on June 10, 2008. On June 11, 2008, the Mesa Police Department made a mirror image of the Toshiba hard drive that was on that laptop computer. The State disclosed the laptop computer to the defense. On June 19, 2009, the laptop computer was turned on and accessed at the Mesa Police Department during a review of evidence meeting attended by attorneys representing the defendant. The case agent, prosecutor, and defense investigator were also present during that meeting.  On January 31, 2013, Lonnie Dworkin, an expert witness for the defendant, testified at the guilt phase trial that he had reviewed items at the Mesa Police Department, including item #390633, the Compaq Presario laptop computer that belonged to the victim. Mr. Dworkin testified he received a mirror image of the Toshiba hard drive for that computer from the Mesa Police Department. According to Detective Perry Smith, who testified at the evidentiary hearing on December 11, 2014, that mirror image was created in December 2009. This mirror image contained changes made to the hard drive when it was awakened from sleep mode by Detective Flores on June 10, 2008 and changes that occurred when it was turned on for review by defense counsel on June 19, 2009. At the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin explained to the jury the procedure he followed to forensically examine the hard drive he received in the E01 file format, including the steps he took to recover lost or deleted folders. He also explained the method he used to retrieve the internet history. Mr. Dworkin provided testimony regarding when the laptop computer was accessed on June 4, 2008. See R.T. January 31, 2013. On February 4, 2013, during cross examination at the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin testified he recalled seeing some pornography on the victim’s computer AND THIS IS SO IMPORTANT I AM ABOUT TO HAVE TO WRITE FOR AN HOUR BECAUSE A GROWN MAN HAD PORN ON HIS COMPUTER. ARREST EVERY MALE AGE 18 AND UP RIGHT NOW.  but he was not asked to look for that type of information. See R.T. February 4, 2013, page 52, line 3 through page 54, line 3. During an interview with a Mesa Police Department detective on December 10, 2014, reference was made to a mirror image of the victim’s hard drive made by the Mesa Police Department on June 11, 2008. Defense counsel requested a copy of that mirror image. The State provided a copy of that mirror image to the defendant in December 2014. According to one of the defendant’s expert witnesses, Bryan Neumeister(WHO IN THIS JUDGES OPINION IS A TOOL. JUST SAYIN’), when the victim’s laptop computer was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008, the computer downloaded updates that were not installed until it was turned on again. This did not occur until June 19, 2009. Thus, the mirror image created on June 11, 2008 should contain the changes made to the hard drive after it was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008 prior to those changes being installed. There is also an issue regarding files being overwritten. The computer experts working with the parties are still analyzing the mirror image of the victim’s hard drive made in June 2008. On January 8, 2015, John Smith, a computer forensic expert witness hired by the defendant, testified at the penalty phase retrial. Mr. Smith examined the mirror images of the hard drive created on June 11, 2008 and December 12, 2009 as well as the original hard drive seized by the Mesa Police Department on June 10, 2008. He testified he had only 3 or 4 days to conduct a review of the June 11, 2008 mirror image of the hard drive. He testified he found data sites containing pornographic links to websites on the Toshiba hard drive. Mr. Smith testified if he had more time to analyze the hard drive it was possible he could have found more pornography links. Mr. Smith testified that none of the images he reviewed were an exact image of the Toshiba hard drive before it was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008. However, the June 11, 2008 hard drive is the closest exact image. The source evidence and mirror images of the hard drive created on June 11, 2008 and December 12, 2009 contained the same pornographic data sites. These data sites provide the historical record to the pornographic sites visited or accessed by that computer. Mr. Smith testified he found artifacts or remnants of porn in the logs and history files. He testified he found no pornographic photographs, videos or other pornographic media on the hard drive. There was no indication data had been manipulated on that hard drive. Mr. Smith also testified the mirror images of the hard drive he reviewed were automatically modified or altered by the computer on June 10, 2008 and June 19, 2009 but the data files containing the pornographic links were still present after the alterations. Mr. Smith testified that the victim’s laptop computer contained numerous cleaner programs. The goal of these programs is to clean the computer and make it run more efficiently. These programs clean the registry and internet history and can be set to run at a regularly scheduled time or can be run manually. REALLY ALFRED E. YOU JUST MADE ME WRITE ALL THIS WHEN IN THE END IT ALL AMOUNTED TO A BIG BUNCH OF NOTHING. I’M RECONSIDERING THOSE SANCTIONS. On January 14, 2015, Mr. Smith testified that a modification to a hard drive does not change the data on the registry tables. No evidence files were deleted and the history or cookies were not affected when the hard drive was accessed on June 10, 2008 or June 19, 2009. The files that were modified or overwritten were the operating files. Defendant claims the failure to provide the defendant with a copy of the mirror image created on June 11, 2008 prior to December 2014 was an intentional disclosure violation. Further, Defendant claims that mirror image contains exculpatory evidence. No testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing to explain why the Mesa Police Department provided Mr. Dworkin with a hard drive of the victim’s computer created on December 12, 2009. The Court has no basis to find the Mesa Police Department withheld evidence or refused to provide a copy of any evidence to Mr. Dworkin. To the contrary, a mirror image of the victim’s computer was given to Mr. Dworkin. As he testified at the trial, the focus of the defense at that time was not on the pornography contained on the victim’s computer. Rather, the focus was on the timeline of events that occurred on June 4, 2008. Mr. Dworkin was able to testify about those matters at the guilt phase trial. During cross examination at the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin testified he had been interviewed by the prosecutor about the pornography on the victim’s computer but it had been two years earlier and he could not recall specific details or what he had stated during that interview. Exhibit 9 from the evidentiary hearing conducted on December 4, 2014, the Chain of Custody log maintained by the Mesa Police Department, shows that Detective Melendez and Detective Rios removed the computer from the evidence room on June 11, 2008, stating the evidence was out for investigation. Defense counsel and their expert witnesses received a copy of this log. Mr. Dworkin discussed protocols he followed for examining hard drives. As a computer forensic expert, he would have been aware that it is routine for law enforcement to make a mirror image of the hard drive. Detective Melendez was interviewed by defense counsel prior to trial and testified at the guilt phase trial and the penalty phase retrial. He was examined about his review of the laptop computer hard drive. There is no evidence he intentionally hid the existence of the June 11, 2008 mirror image or failed to provide a copy of the mirror image created in June 2008. According to the defense expert, John Smith, the content on the original hard drive (the “source evidence”) and all mirror images is the same with regard to the pornographic data sites to which Mr. Smith testified. In fact, the source evidence and June 11, 2008 mirror image are the same. Defendant argues that failure to provide the June 11, 2008 mirror image could have affected the jury’s verdict in the guilt phase trial because the State argued during closing argument that there was no corroboration for the defendant’s claim that she saw the victim viewing child pornography on his laptop computer. That issue is not properly before this Court. However, Mr. Dworkin testified at the guilt phase trial he had seen pornography on the laptop. Thus the defendant had the opportunity to pursue the issue during the guilt phase trial. The defendant has an expert witness who testified at the penalty phase retrial about the pornography links he found on the victim’s computer. The State may present evidence disputing the findings of that expert. However, the penalty phase retrial jury will have the benefit of the testimony about the contents found on the victim’s computer hard drive in evaluating the defendant’s testimony about what she says she observed the victim doing on January 21, 2008 as well as the testimony of the defendant’s expert witnesses. (OMFG I’M STILL NOT DONE WITH THIS. SOMEBODY IS GETTING TICKETED NEXT TIME THEY HIT GOLDEN CORRAL.)  The original laptop computer and hard drive were disclosed by the State and available for analysis by defense expert witnesses. The evidence at issue was on the source evidence (the original hard drive) and mirror images created from the source evidence. The penalty phase retrial is ongoing. If the defense expert finds additional evidence after further review of the 2008 mirror image, he can be recalled as a witness. Dismissal of the notice of intent to seek the death penalty is not an appropriate sanction for a discovery violation of this nature. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED DENIED DENIED AND I AM SO PISSED OFF RIGHT NOW

6. Social media postings by the case agent’s wife prejudiced the defendant. (,./MZ CBV XM,. .AS.,MAXNF.ADMN JT, SORRY MY HEAD HIT THE KEYBOARD) Defendant  alleges the case agent, Detective Flores, provided nonpublic details about the case to his wife who “tweeted” her opinions on social media. In addition, Detective Flores’ wife supposedly posted a video on You Tube which Defendant Arias describes as a mock movie trailer about the case. Defendant also provided copies of other social media exchanges in which the parties discussed trial matters including a claim that the defendant had a buddy write for her “in prison to create evidence for her story.”See EVERY PIECE OF WASTED PAPER THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THIS ASSININE MOTION. No testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing regarding these claims BECAUSE WHO NEEDS TESTIMONY WHEN  ONE OF STABBY’S SUPPORTERS SAYS SO IN A LETTER TO THE DEFENSE. STABBY relies on the attachments to her motion filed on October 1, 2014 as support for her allegations. The Court has reviewed those attachments. The Court finds the defendant has failed to establish THAT DETECTIVE FLORES’ WIFE EVEN ACTUALLY EXISTS, NEVERMIND THAT IT WAS HER TALKING ON SOCIAL MEDIA. The attachments to the motion indicate SOMEONE WHO PROFESSED TO BE DETECTIVE FLORES WIFE stated there “was much condemning evidence and situations that most people never heard by watching the trial,” discusses the dismissal of a juror, and discusses a court assistant who allegedly made a derogatory statement about the prosecutor. The Court previously made a record about the matter involving the court assistant. The statement supposedly occurred in the courtroom, not a sealed proceeding. The court assistant denied making the statement. Whether there is any truth to the other statements purportedly made by the detective’s wife in her posts is unclear. The Court does not take lightly the allegation that Detective Flores provided nonpublic information to his wife about the case. Detective Flores has ROLLED HIS EYES SO HARD AT THIS MOTION I’M SURPRISED THEY DID NOT BOUNCE JAUNTILY ACROSS MY COURTROOM.  Defense counsel has not questioned him about these matters or provided any other evidence BECAUSE THERE ISN’T ANY that would permit this Court to find he violated any court orders. Additionally, some of the information referenced in the attachments may have been discussed in open court and thus there was no violation. There have been numerous court hearings on this case, including hearings in chambers and sealed hearings. This Court cannot recall all of the details of those hearings SINCE THIS TRIAL HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE THE INCEPTION OF TIME. Without transcripts or testimony by individuals present at those hearings, this Court has insufficient information to find a violation of the court’s orders. The Court is unaware of any legal reason the detective’s wife should be restricted from providing her opinion or commenting about the case on social media. Even if the court had evidence that Detective Flores had discussed matters from a sealed proceeding with his wife, Defendant has failed to show that it affected her case in any way. The penalty phase retrial jurors were questioned about any prior knowledge of the case including information obtained through the media. None of the jurors indicated any knowledge about these social media exchanges. Defendant does not allege how her case was prejudiced by these incidents. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DOUBLE DOG DENIED THE COURT ALSO HIGHLY RECOMMENDS THAT THE DEFENSE STOP LETTING A CRACKPOT WHO WANTS TO BE STABBY’S BESTEST FRIEND INTERFERE WITH THE DIRECTION OF THIS TRIAL.

7. Detective Flores allegedly commented or provided information to the press about the dismissal of a juror. BECUASE SOME CRAZY BITCH ON SOCIAL MEDIA MADE IT UP,  no testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing about this claim. Exhibit G to the defendant’s motion filed on October 1, 2014 contains a social media message allegedly from the detective’s wife referencing a conversation with a juror that occurred in chambers. It is unknown how the information was provided to Ms. Flores. Defendant presumes the information came from the detective. Defendant does not allege how her case was affected by the social media statement. Even if the detective had discussed a sealed matter with his wife, Defendant has not shown that her case was affected in any way. The jurors empanelled for the penalty phase retrial were questioned about any knowledge about the case and none of them referenced any knowledge of this incident. Based upon the information provided, the Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. TRIPLE DIP DENIED

8. The Maricopa County Sheriff(REALLY? THE SHERIFF AGAIN?) made harassing comments about POOR MUFFIN, I MEAN STABBY  to the media BECAUSE HE IS A YELLY, GRILLY, BAD MAN JUST LIKE JUAN. STABBY claims (A LOT OF THINGS, NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO BE TRUE) the Maricopa County Sheriff responded to media inquiries about a pleading allegedly filed by the defendant and those responses were intended to harass the defendant. A document was filed with the federal court alleging violations of law relating to Defendant EINSTEIN. The document, purportedly filed by or on behalf of the defendant, alleged various ways(NONE OF WHICH WERE ACTUALLY DESCRIBED,  STABBY had been improperly treated while in custody. The media apparently contacted the Maricopa County Sheriff seeking his response to the allegations. The sheriff denied the allegations in the document. It is unclear whether the sheriff viewed any document prior to speaking with the media. However, the sheriff told the media that inmates are not required to state the pledge of allegiance in order to receive meals. The sheriff also stated he had no knowledge of a Hepatitis C infection at the jail. He denied that the defendant was videotaped while in the restroom and that he or his staff had intercepted letters from or to the defendant and provided them to the media. The sheriff also denied the allegation that the defendant was denied medical treatment while in the jail.  SINCE SHE KNEW NONE OF THAT WAS GOING TO FLY, Defendant now asserts she was harassed by the sheriff’s comments.(HMM, I WASN’T THERE/THE NINJA’S DID IT-THE SHERIFF HARASSED STABBY/HIS COMMENTS HARRASED ME) This situation occurred after the first trial and before the penalty phase retrial began. Defendant does not suggest that any information provided by the sheriff was inaccurate or misleading. During jury selection, the potential jurors for the penalty phase retrial were questioned about their knowledge of the case and any media coverage of the case. The defendant had an opportunity to question each potential juror about this incident. Knowledge of this incident was not reported by any of the jurors selected for the penalty phase retrial. Defendant has not shown any prejudice to her case from this incident. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim.  NEGADO

9. Detective Flores “awakened” the victim’s computer from sleep mode on June 10, REALLY, WE’RE BACK TO THIS AGAIN? FUCK IT DENIED.

10. Evidence was possibly destroyed when the victim’s computer was accessed on June 19, 2009. Detective Flores and the prosecutor were present when former defense counsel for the defendant viewed the victim’s computer on June 19, 2009. REALLY, SHE’S BLAMING HER OWN DEFENSE NOW? WELL, AT LEAST IT’S A NEW IDEA.  Turning on the computer at that time changed the hard drive on the victim’s computer. The Mesa Police Department made a mirror image of the victim’s computer on June 11, 2008, the day after the victim’s computer was seized. Any changes that were made to the hard drive as a result of turning on the computer without a write blocker on June 19, 2009 will not affect the content of the mirror image created on June 11, 2008. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. JE REFUSE’

11. Prior attorneys for the defendant were ineffective. Defendant claims her former attorneys were ineffective on June 19, 2009 when they permitted the victim’s computer to be turned on without proper precautions being taken to preserve evidence on that computer. WAIT A MINUTE, DID I NOT JUST RULE ON THIS ONLY WORDED SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY? [あらがう

12. Detective Melendez testified at trial and the penalty phase retrial that he found no pornography or viruses on the victim’s computer. Detective Melendez testified at the guilt phase trial on April 23, 2013 that he examined the internet history on the victim’s computer and found no adult sites. He testified he looked at the computer files and found no images of children. At the penalty phase retrial, Detective Melendez testified he found no pornography or viruses on the victim’s computer. The defendant has one or more expert witnesses who analyzed the mirror image of the hard drive to the victim’s laptop computer. Lonnie Dworkin examined the hard drive to the victim’s laptop computer and testified on behalf of the defendant at the guilt phase trial. See paragraph 5 above. John Smith testified at the penalty phase retrial that there were pornography links found on data sites. In addition, he found viruses or malware on the victim’s computer. Detective Melendez was subject to cross examination at all proceedings at which he testified and can be recalled by the defense at the penalty phase retrial. Defendant could have called witnesses to dispute his findings at the guilt phase trial. The defendant presented evidence to the penalty phase retrial jury on this issue. It is the role of the jury to resolve any factual disputes, evaluate the credibility of witnesses and determine the significance of the evidence AND I STOPPED GIVING A FUCK 4 MOTIONS AGO. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. BESTREITEN

13. Comments by the prosecutor during a bench conference were PRETTY MUCH DEAD ON.  Defendant alleges the prosecutor made a comment to Defense Counsel during a bench conference that was insulting and unprofessional. WAIT. WHAT? HOW THE FUCK DID MY CLERK EVEN LET THIS MOTION THROUGH. THEY ACTUALLY WANT ME TO CONSIDER REMOVING THE DEATH PENALTY BECAUSE POOR MUFFINS LAWYERS FEELINGS GOT HURT? DID SOMEBODY SLIP ME A MICKEY. AM I BEING PUNKED? FIIIINE!! BLAH BLAH BLAH LEGAL STUFF. DEFUCKINGNIED

14. The prosecutor harassed a defense witness BY DOING HIS JOB. THE MORE INTELLIGENT THAN EINSTEIN-Y ONE alleges the prosecutor harassed an expert witness at the guilt phase trial by suggesting the witness had inappropriate feelings toward the defendant. This matter was addressed during the guilt phase trial. The State suggested an expert witness for the defendant had Developed personal feelings toward the defendant and lost his professional objectivity. The prosecutor referred to a gift the witness gave to the defendant and the number of visits (12) the witness made to see her as the basis for his questions. See cross examination of Dr. Samuels on March 18, 2013. PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO THIS PART. A party is entitled to explore the bias, credibility and motive of witnesses. The prosecutor zealously cross examined the defense expert on these matters. Defense Counsel questioned the witness about these issues on redirect examination. The Court finds no basis to conclude there was prosecutorial misconduct. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim.  CAN I ACTUALLY DENY THIS TWICE? SOMEBODY HAVE MY CLERK LOOK THAT UP.

15. The prosecutor signed an autograph OMFG DENIED.

16. Reluctance of witnesses to testify at penalty phase retrial. Defendant claims that potential defense witnesses have refused to participate in the penalty phase retrial because they fear the prosecutor may make “improper personal attacks in court and inspire others to attack them outside court.” See page 19, defendant’s October 1, 2014 Motion to Dismiss. ONCE AGAIN PLEASE PAY ATTENTION A party has the right to challenge the credibility, bias and motive of a witness unless the court determines the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or will confuse the issues. See Rule 403, Arizona Rules of Evidence. If the challenge is objectionable, the opposing party has the right to object and the court will rule. In this case, the prosecutor has zealously cross examined the witnesses. The courtroom is open to the public. The court cannot control what the public and media report about what they observe in the courtroom. OKAY YOU KNOW WHAT? MY HAND HURTS, I NEED A STABBY STRENGTH TYLENOL AND I ALREADY COVERED THIS SHIT. OTKAZ

17. The cumulative effect of the prosecutorial misconduct resulted in an unfair trial. OH PUHLEASE. THAT’S IT, I’M PEACING THE FUCK OUT. I’M A FAKE JUDGE I CAN DO WHAT I WANT.WHAT DO YOU MEAN I HAVE TO FINISH IT. IT WOULD BE WAY MORE FUN TO PLAY PIN THE PENIS ON STABBY SOME MORE. COME ON, YOU CAN GO FIRST. YOU KNOW THAT NO MATTER WHERE YOU PIN IT, IT GOES THERE. BEING A FAKE JUDGE SUCKS.

IT IS ORDERED denying the defendant’s ridiculous, monotonous, and complete waste of time never mind all the dead trees that have resulted from all these motions.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the State’s Motion for Sanctions (Compaq

Presario Computer) filed November 16, 2014 and the State’s Motion to Strike

FILED THIS 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 2015
HON RBMD

PayPal Donate Button

Hai! If you enjoy my blog please consider a donation. All donations are hugely appreciated.

Advertisements

The Stabby Einstein Penalty Phase Retrial- Garbage In Garbage Out Edition (thank you Jeffrey Gold)

December 16, 2014

 

If I lose this post again I’m just not fucking posting it- Arizona

Hai everybody. So, I just wrote and lost this blog. TWICE. We are having brown outs and for whatever reason my computer is not saving anygoddamnthing at the moment. I am not amused. But, I am dedicated if nothing else so I will try this one more time.

I have to give Nurmi some credit because he has pulled off a brilliant tactical move. He won’t say whether Stabby will or won’t continue to testify until he hears from the COA so Juan can’t make a motion to have her testimony stricken if she decides not to testify. And he did it just before he brought out the defenses next idiot for Hire Dr. Gefner. Otherwise known as the human ventriloquist dummy. Dr. Geffner of water spilling fame from the first trial. So whatever she said is still in the Jury’s minds, can’t be stricken and now we have some paid doofus to further pound whatever it was into their heads.

Jenny From the Cell Block is up on Direct and we are once again going through the entire life and times of Dr. Geffner. For those of you who missed the first time around, this is what happened: Harpo, who dis man is, Arizona

If foghorn Leghorn and General Custer had a kid, it would be the dude on the let’s try and make all these nice people think these are not the droids they are looking for sur-rebuttal train. Aerosmith was present for a scathing rendition of “Train Kept Rollin’ which had the entire gallery on its feet. The vet waited patiently as Conductor Stephens kept the minions shoveling coal and the train picked up speed. Jenny from the Cell Block took a stab (yes, I said it and it stays) at something new today. Boring the jury into submission just so they could get the hell out of there. We spent an entire day talking about the Foghorn leghorn Jedi Masters credentials. Where he went to school, how long he went to school, who he banged at school, how many bong hits he took at school, his favorite cafeteria food at school. The fact that he NEVER talked about Stabby, or read a police report only came up when he stared straight into the gallery and did that Jedi thing with his hands and said “None of those facts are relevant” The only time we were actually sure he was alive was when he got onto the subject of Janeen DeMarte and her Diagnosis of BPD. With a totally straight face he told Jenny from the cell block that he’s right, Janeen is wrong neener neener. It was a breathtaking display of testimony.

Alfred E. Nurmi spent a good deal of the day looking like he paid the vet to shoot a dart into his ass and Stabby stared at the jury like the death eater that she secretly is. All we need now is he who shall not be named, Harry Potter and a wand dual and the circle of life will be complete.

Jenny from the Cell Block is going to lose points in the beauty part of the pageant of the insane due to the ever growing bald spot on her head. Good thing she has all that poise and charm or she’d be out already.

Geffner actually managed to keep a straight face as he told the jury he determined Stabby didn’t lie or distort her answers on Dr. Demarte’s psychological tests. He also said the tests did not indicate an aggressive, hostile, or violent personality, but rather a crushed flower in the throes of PTSD. The sympathy vote missed the whole thing as she snored through the testimony.

Geffner decided court would be a great place to practice his standup routine. This expert witness with eighthundredmillion years worth of experience couldn’t operate the touch screen computer and managed to spill water all over himself, the witness stand, the floor, the vet and conductor Stephens a couple of times.

The highlight of the entire routine however was when Geffner, who has a familiarity with brains, you know like I have a familiarity with nuclear fusion, was asked to use his zero experience with autopsies to refute Medical Examiner Horne’s testimony about the gunshot coming last. The psychologist/standup comedian testified that in his inexperienced and totally untrained opinion, Travis could have turned into a zombie and totally continued to walk and stuff. Then he took another bong hit and braced while the dog handler put the attack suit on him before they turned Juan loose.

Somebody had some extra raw steak at lunch because a completely foaming at the mouth Juan fairly leapt out of his chair and charged the obviously terrified Geffner. He immediately crushed his non-existent credibility by informing the gallery that dudes testimony had been tossed as having absolutely no merit at several other trials where he’d been a witness. Mortimer Snerd just smiled and giggled in what seemed to be an attempt to keep the obviously rabid pit-bull at bay.

Juan then to the surprise of absolutely no one anywhere, proceeded to lay the smack down of all smack downs on the ventriloquist dummy sitting on the stand about Mortimers absolutely no validity, uniformed thoughts on Travis’ gunshot wound. The smell of brimstone started to permeate the air and we all wondered for a moment if Jenny would be called back from whence she came due to her stunning FAIL at ever calling this witness.

That was last time. Time has to be better right. He’s had practice now. He knows what to do. You would think that but no it was pretty much exactly the same.  Juan has already had to have two darts put into him because he got the illustrious Psychologist’s notes from the university of Malingering (thank you Stabby’s Pencil) for fun and profit at just past 11pm last night.  Geffner the human ventriloquist dummy is expected to be on the stand all week (oh goody) and Juan needs at least two days to interview him.  This time around Mortimer Snerd isn’t just going to talk about his interviews with Stabbykins he is also going to talk about every other experts interview with her which doesn’t sound quite right to me. Remind me to check on that.  He already has the Dr. Samuels I love you Stabbykins look on his face so she has obviously been communing with Satan again.  Since she doesn’t have a soul maybe she just traded him for some anal and a blowie?

Going over the MMPI2 that diagnosed her with borderline personality disorder and instead of arguing this time he is likely to agree, because agreeing means she has a mental problem and somebody on the Jury might go for that.

Stabby apparently reported lots of symptoms of trauma probably largely in part to things like killing a guy and then telling a bunch of bullshit that nobody believed and then being incarcerated. I’d be a little traumatized too.

The Jedi Master is now going over Stabby’s rather high score on Stabby being a psychopath. Bet they didn’t pay him to say that shit.  I got 5 that says that was said accidentally.  She also has major sexual issues to which the entire planet collectively said “No. Really?”

Since pretty much every time Stabby opens her mouth it is either self serving or an outright lie I would say most of what Geffner has to say is useless because if he hasn’t noticed she LIES.

He actually called the PTSD that she has from butchering a man a mitigating factor.  I shit you not he really honest to god said that.  He has however so far managed to not spill anything on himself so he is at least doing better that way.  Just as an aside the Jury isn’t taking any notes on the Psych testimony so whatever her super secret testimony was, it looks like they don’t really give a shit.

Mortimer Snerd admitted on the record that nobody knows what the fuck is going on in that psychotic little head of hers, it’s all just a guess.  ON THE RECORD.

That is it for today kids, but just think we have a whole week of this to look forward too.  Juan shredded him last time, I hope he brought the attack suit.

Have a great night. RBMD peacing the fuck out.

PayPal Donate Button

Hai.  If you enjoy my blog please consider donating to my furnace oil fund.  Dying of hypothermia doesn’t sound like a good time to me.  All donations no matter the size help me put oil in my furnace. Every single donation is greatly appreciated. 


The Stabby Arias Penalty Phase Retrial-The Suffering In Silence Edition

November 25, 2014

I know I have said it before but; AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!-Arizona

Hai everybody. Been a minute hasn’t it? I have emailed Jim Blackburn about 6 times now and he keeps promising me as soon as he can get to it he will and I don’t want to keep bugging him so I guess we will wait on the Jeffrey(the hippies did it)McDonald story.

Sorry about last night, windstorm was crazy and I had no power for just about ever. I did get the generator out long enough to leave a post here but I don’t know if everybody saw it. So, yeah no power, no blog. The only downside to living in the middle of buttfuck nowhere is you are hooped when stuff like that happens. Oh and just as an aside, generators are heavy as fuck.

I have a question for all y’all in the states? WTF are they putting in your water and shit? Holy. I did not have the internet last night because we had a huge wind storm and it knocked the power out. I get up this morning and Ferguson is on fire. Jesus Christ people. You know what? I get that people are angry, and frustrated, and probably filled with rage. What I don’t get; trashing stores that are owned by members of the community, lighting cop cars on fire that y’all get to pay for out of your tax money, and fighting against people that have BULLETS and shit. I watched for about 2 minutes and turned it off. What does this accomplish exactly? It is not going to bring that boy back and it sure as shit isn’t going to make the police less likely to shoot the next one and that whether or not you like it is just a fact. And for all us white folks out there. I think it’s nice and all you are showing solidarity, I truly do. But damn, don’t pretend like you understand what is going through your African American friends/neighbors/spouses soul, because unless somebody owned a member of your family and once that was over you were treated like you were livestock you just don’t. No matter how much you sympathize, you cannot, will not, EVER, understand the rage. It is like being non-Jewish and saying you understand what the Holocaust survivors went through. It is a patently ridiculous statement.

So Stabby. We started the day waiting for sometimes Judge Stephens and watching Nurmi google Alfred E. Nurmi and his reaction to what popped up. Either that or surfing twitter to check on those damn Jurors who might be using social media.

Sometimes Judge Stephens eventually showed up, Great Nana Dr. Sexpert was back on the stand and Juan, well Juan was about as mad as he has ever been. Three darts, and a half a box of good boy treats later, he was almost calm enough to get up and start cross examining. Almost.

He leaped up with a snarl and went immediately for Dr. Sexperts Jugular area. He started by asking about sexual practices and Stabby shaving the gaping opening to hell. He wanted to know if the fact that she went bald as a cue-ball was important to her? Great Nana Dr. Sexpert, who you will totally see before this is over has no bias what so ever (OMGLOLROFLMAO) said yes. Juan was on fucking fire. He wanted to know if what she was saying was that Stabby baring the curtains had to do with Travis. Great Nana Dr. Sexpert definitely seemed to be insinuating that but when confronted with the question head on said she didn’t know how Stabby groomed herself (BRB gotta find the Pretoria puke bucket) prior to this. Juan was determined to run this “expert” to ground today. Why didn’t you ask if she did this before? Are u saying this practice is so unique to Stabby and Travis that this was worth considering? She said that that wasn’t what she was saying but it totally was. The pitbull asked her if she did consider this though and she had to answer yes. Holy shit getting a straight answer out of this chick is like getting a bong out of Jenny From the Cell Blocks hands. FUCK!! And with that we were welcomed to sidebar number one of the day. Nurms is NOT amused.

Back from the sidebar, Great Nana Dr. Sexpert threw on her tri-focals and started to read a document while bitching about having to read said document, say it with me now, CONTEMPERANEOUSLY. She felt pressure to read the entire document to which I say, um aren’t things like the oh, I don’t know, DETAILS of the document kind of important? The pit bull said he was just trying to refresh her memory which I though was genius because it intimated that Great Nana Dr. Sexpert may have a memory problem. Hint, she doesn’t she just never read the fucking file unless the paragraph started “Stabby Said.” She went over the document and Juan said it was Matt that wanted to break up with Stabby and moved to get away from her. Great Nana isn’t having anyone dissing her Stabby and says she understood it that Matt cheated and they broke up. Juan then wanted to know if it maybe wasn’t just a little aggressive of Stabby to drive to confront Bianca, the chick that Matt was banging by this time. Dr. Sexpert actually kept a straight face while she said “nope, nuh uh, this is how every normal person acts.” Juan then said Stabby wasn’t suffering in silence at that time, was she? Great Nana Dr. Sexpert says this was a different relationship than Travis, which doesn’t really answer the question. Just sayin. She says she suffered in silence only with Travis. The pitbull was still on full roar and dart number 4 was deployed. The sarcasm dripping from his fangs he said “So you’re saying this suffering in silence skipped over Bobby, skipped over Matt, skipped over Darryl & landed right on Travis? Dr. Sexpert says she wouldn’t use the term skip over. (If she gets Juan to define something, I’m out!) Juan gave the expert a refresher course on the trials and tribulations of Stabby and her live ex-boyfriends aaaaaaaand sidebar number 2. We came back and the pitbull asked if she was refreshed as to the break ups. She said it described them but she doesn’t recall. Juan gently tells Great Nana Dr. Sexpert that she testified to specifics and she said “I don’t recall.” Juan got that quizzical look that all great dogs get when they are trying to figure something out and gently reminded her that she said it involved the computer. She said “I don’t recall.” Juan suddenly knew what was happening. That damn fog had rolled back in. He tested his theory. Isn’t it true Darryl tried to break up with Stabby and she’d have none of that? She said “I don’t recall he’d have none of it.” I’m starting to wonder if Great Nana Dr. Sexpert has dementia setting in. Either that or she watched all six seasons of OZ as a refresher course on how to testify. (HBO show from the late 90’s-early 2000’s. Google it.) Dr. Sexpert also could not recall when Stabby and Travis started to date, or her moving to seaside.

Juan got bored and moved on to more suffering in silence. He wanted to know if Stabby was suffering in silence when she went through Travis’ phone. Dr. Sexpert said no, that the suffering in silence came after. (BARF!) Someone remind me to send Mi’lady a Christmas card for sending me the puke bucket. Juan said that even when Stabby suspected that he was seeing other women she stayed in the relationship because she wanted to go on trips. Dr. Sexpert says that she kept that information to herself for a while. He brought up the balloon festival trip and Nurms suddenly woke the fuck up and brought up sidebar number 3.

And we were back and then back to the sidebar for number 4. Back again and Juan brought up the fact that they only dated for several months. Juan says that within two weeks of the break-up she moved from California to Arizona and the totally not biased at all Dr. Sexpert said “well, it’s not like they lived in the same ward or community.” Jesus if MY eyes rolled any harder they would be bouncing jauntily across the fucking room. The pitbull asks if that is pretty assertive? Dr. Sexpert counters that they had an ongoing sexual relationship. Well that isn’t suffering in silence is it? the pitbull roared.

Juan asked about Stabby playing peek a boo while Travis was making out with a woman. The still TOTALLY objective Dr. Sexpert said “well, she needed her social security card to which I say, What?” Juan asked the good ole’ Dr. Sexpert if peeping in someones windows is suffering in silence? Anyone see a theme here? Juan asked, “she won’t leave him alone will she?” Dr. Sexpert at least conceded that maybe Stabby was a little intrusive.

There was a 15 minute break and next we got to talked about being closeted and nope it’s not what you think. Apparently, the relationship that no longer existed and was just banging because like I have said a billion times, if some chick is throwing it around the guy is going to grab it, was “closeted.” It was closeted because Travis didn’t take out a half page add in the local paper that he was butt banging Stabby. when it was brought up that Stabby wasn’t running around telling the whole world she was banging Travis that was apparently different somehow because why the fuck not.

Stabby was looking kind of forlorn after lunch, but not Juan. Juan was looking…like the tranquilizer was wearing off. You are required to be informed and objective when you review materials but in this case you haven’t been objective, RIGHT? Dr. Sexpert said she used data points to keep it objective.

Next up was a chat log between Stabby and Travis which Great Nana Dr. Sexpert called a five hour rant. It was 2hrs and 10sec and Juan was all over her like she was a porterhouse steak. “You wanted to make this seem like Travis was out of control didn’t you?” snarled the mighty pitbull. “You were wrong on the time weren’t you? You went ahead and made a wrong statement to the jury.” Juan was in full attack mode now and Flores calmly put the attack suit on just in case he had to pole catch the ranting pit. 5 hours sure seems more impactful doesn’t it? He roared. And you also said the chat log was 16 pages when it was only twelve. You are supposed to be accurate right? Great Nana Dr. Sexpert said yes but the chat was formatted where it could be 16 pages to which once again I say WHAT? It is 12 pages or it is 16. It cannot be both.

We moved on to Dan Freeman and his sister and the trip they all took together. Juan said Travis wasn’t hiding her from his friends right? They went on trips together and when they got in an argument and Travis said something Stabby came right back didn’t she? That is not suffering in silence RIGHT? Juan then pointed out that Great Nana Dr. Sexpert said she had made an assessment of Travis to which she said no, it was more of an observation. The pitbull of course refused to back the fuck up and said “you made an assessment, a diagnosis out of this. Just what you said you aren’t doing right?” Next we got to define Assessment and I was about to quit this bitch like I said, but Juan was done and I figured I might as well see how much Nurmi did damage control for a bit. During that time we got another run down of Dr. Sexperts CV, the fact that sex sells and we shouldn’t be distracted and that she felt the state was insinuating that she was unethical and they mischaracterized her testimony. HINT No he didn’t. He didn’t insinuate a damn thing. He made it crystal fucking clear that is what he thought.

We are now recessed until December 2 2014. #giftfrombabyjesus

There you have it my lovelies you are now up to date on the never ending trial. RBMD peacing the fuck out!!

PayPal Donate Button

Hai! If you enjoy my blog, please consider donating to ensure content.  All donations are greatly appreciated. 


Unfortunately, There Is No Cure For Stupid

October 20, 2014

And the stupid just keeps on comin’-Arizona

Hai kids.  As you can guess by the title of today’s little ditty, I may or may not be somewhat annoyed at some of the shit that has been flying around the internet.  The truckload of freshly fermenting pig shit that is the crap going around about Stabby and how she is fucking innocent.  Just for the record, right now this second lets just get one simple little FACT straight.  You know just for everyone’s edification.  Stabby viciously murdered Travis Alexander.  She was not fighting for her life, you don’t stab someone in the back when they are attacking you from the front.  Spent casings do NOT get kicked around in pools of blood without leaving a trail of blood from where it started to where it ended.  You do not almost cut off the head of someone who is to the point where they are crawling on their hands and knees if you are in an altercation you want to get away from, you run in the fucking opposite direction. You can sprinkle any kind of magical pixie dust on that shit that you want, hell you can dip it in pop-tart frosting; it is NOT going to change the fact that Stabby is a cold blooded, pre-meditated murderess. Yeah, I said it, she totally pre-meditated that shit and for you stabbyites who stalk my site and send me all those ever so charming emails, suck on that.

Now, because they are all butthurt for a variety of reasons, not the least of which being that Stabby’s good old mitigation specialist/dance instructor is having a good long look taken at her and exactly what she has been up to during this whole shit show. Miss mitigation2014 is in it up to her asshole. The only real question is what her cut is? Anyway, because they have nothing else left to bitch about, the Kool-Aid drinking troglodytes have decided that dragging Chris Hughes back into this with theories that the reflection in Travis’ eye is now Mormon undergarments is a truly brilliant idea. Because Chris Hughes hasn’t been through enough. And Travis’ family hasn’t been through enough. The friends that found his crumpled up rotting corpse have not been through enough. You think they don’t see that in their nightmares every night? I promise you that they do. Not only did the psychopathic bitch kill Travis, she killed his grandmother, and she destroyed 20 other lives at a bare minimum. Those are just the people that were especially close to Travis, not included are his casual friends. Nobody talks about how many people the man who overcame insurmountable odds to become something that was special and good and kind could have helped. They talk about how this is all a Mormon conspiracy and Stabby is totally innocent. Instead of talking about how she “innocently” almost decapitated a man, they talk about how she has been railroaded by an entire laundry list of people who all came together because the simply could not handle the fabulousness of Stabby fucking Einstein. Talk about how she stalked him, and peeped into his windows and slashed his tires and threatened any woman in his life and they deflect with the fact that he said a few unkind words to her in an email. Words that were no doubt in my mind wholly deserved. Mention that Stabby was nothing but a whore who used her body to try and elevate her station in life and we are slut shaming her. She is, was, and always will be a slut of epic scale. I agree that woman have every much right to use men for sex as men do to use women for sex, I draw the line at using your sexuality to get whatever it is that you want. That doesn’t just make you a slut, it makes you a prostitute. You are trading sex for money or prestige or a higher station in life therefore you are a prostitute. I don’t want to hear about how it is done everyday. If a prostitute doesn’t get paid she does not in the normal course of business cut some dudes head off.

Chris and Skye Hughes were Travis’ best friends on earth. The stabbyites say terrible things about Chris Hughes that I will not repeat here because I have followed Chris Hughes on Twitter and he seems to be all about love, redemption and forgiveness. Now, that could be just for show, but I don’t think it is and seriously, how often have I been wrong that you all can think of? They are writing a book about Travis, and who better to do so? Of course Satan’s minions are all over that. Not because they think their queen may be portrayed in a bad light, not because they think that the Hughes are part of the conspiracy. They are angry and screaming about son of sam laws all of a sudden because the Hughes are going to make money off of said book. This is very telling because it means that most of the idiots that follow the psychopath have absolutely zero understanding of what this law is, and it also tells me they are concerned that anybody other than Stabby make any money off of this horrible murder. I was going to say tragedy, but that would imply accident and this was about as pre-meditated as it gets. As for the Hughes making money, I say good. I hope they make money by the dump truck full. I hope a brinks truck has to be backed up to their house once a week to drop off the money. It’s all good for Stabby to make money off of her traced crap, it’s okay to make money from the sale of props from the first trial and it’s okay to collect money for an “appeals fund” that anyone with more than four functioning brain cells knows is going to be used for anything but appeals. She has a private investigator. Remember when she said the money would be for appeals, PI’s anything to help prove her innocence? I do. I also can confirm that the State of Arizona is paying for the private detective that she is using right now. Why is that? Ask one of her majesties minions and they will tell you that either Stabby never said that (but she did and of course I have a screen cap of it) or that the money won’t be used until the appeals process kicks in. I really hope that the IRS is taking a nice long hard look at this whole irrevocable trust. I have sent them a letter, but have not heard back yet. I first let them know that this was happening although I am sure they are aware, and I had a list of questions I asked for clarification on. It was a large list and included several loopholes that I was concerned with and asked if they had any way to change them. I can’t wait for their reply.

Then there was the whole dust-up about the motion to quash the death penalty being a closed hearing. I have to tell you, I have a bit of a problem with that myself. The American justice system is supposed in theory at least to be transparent. It is not. With this trial it seems to become less and less transparent all the time. The reason for the closed hearing however was because certain “evidence” that was deemed inadmissible during the first trial was part of the motion. How do I know this? I know this because I know how to read and I know how to do research. Two things that seem to be woefully lacking on the Stabby loon side of the fence. The item in question had to do with the forged letters that Stabby tried to have introduced into her trial. They were not introduced because they were forgeries. Another thing that the Stabbyites are having kittens about. Our least favorite stalker extraordinaire PV seems to think since there were no originals they could not be proven to be forged. I have an answer for PV and I hope she reads it and actually hears what I am saying. Do you not find it odd that there were copies of what would have been extremely devastating letters and that the originals were destroyed. If these were electronic letters and I can only assume, but since that was how they seemed to communicate I am going to go with that, then there would be a copy on Travis’ hard drive. Of course PV is going to say he erased it. My answer to that is, nothing, not anything not ever is really truly erased on a computer. You can make it go away, but it can be recovered. Nothing ever was because there was nothing to recover. The same reason there was no child porn, or even nice normal regular porn, or anything of that nature. These things were the last grasp at the straw of a very desperate woman. When even the National Enquirer will not print it and my god they have printed things that would make a rational persons hair stand on end, then we can all rest assured that I am correct. I understand that you and logic are not very well acquainted PV, but at least try glancing it’s way once in a while. Fuck me sideways, you are a stupid woman sometimes.

Now to the poor frightened mitigation witnesses that wouldn’t testified because they were so, so scared to do so. Let’s start with Patty “I never met a drug I didn’t like” Womack. Womack is/ or was at the time of mitigation, eating government cheese. Nothing wrong with that. People fall on hard times and that is what the government safety net is for. Want to know what isn’t ok? Selling pictures of your oh so good friend Stabby to HLN to several thousand dollars and then not telling the government so that it can be deducted from your check. That murder money was hers fair and square right? So when she was brought up as a possible mitigation witness, Juan did what Juan does and actually did his job. He looked into Womacks history, found out how much she got for the pictures and that she was a drug user and informed her that if she took the stand he was going to bring up said murder money and her drug use. She retained a lawyer who advised her not to take the stand. If she is taking it now, it is because someone on Stabby’s team has paid the government back to welfare the money she would have had taken from her check and she has perhaps been to rehab although I cannot confirm that at this time. We may be seeing her as a mitigation witness.

Matt McCarney. Once again, when his name was put on the mitigation list, Juan did his due diligence and informed McCartney that his perjury during pre-trial hearings were going to be brought up and charges were going to be likely forthcoming so of course he bailed.

Stabby’s entire family- Lets see, they all gave videotaped interviews during the interrogation stages of this whole thing and nobody had anything very flattering to say. Getting on the stand and suddenly saying what a wonderful joy to behold Stabby was would have immediately brought perjury charges forth. Perjury is not a joke and Juan Martinez is not the one. Believe me, you do not want to be in his way when he gets a bug up his ass, and he definitely has one for this trial.

Last but not least by a long shot, let’s take a moment and talk about the odds and ends. The most disgusting thing I read about this trial was when Stabby said she never wanted to go to trial and tried to “settle” with the prosecution. Settle, like she was dealing with a traffic ticket. She wanted to do man 2 with a guaranteed 10 year sentence. It was therefore, the prosecutors fault and the families fault that they had to sit through all the bullshit that she made up about Travis and couldn’t say a word. The Alexader family have to be some of the most stoic people I have ever seen. Travis would have been so proud.

Alyce LaViolette- I hold a special hatred for Alyce LaViolette and most of you know why. For those that don’t I won’t get into it right now, but I know there is a very special place in hell for Alyce LaViolette. Anyone who would sell their soul for 15 min of fame and the hopes of parlaying their testimony into a book is nothing more than the gaping asshole on Stabby that we spent oh so much time hearing about. It would be so much better for me if I could believe that maybe Stabby just was so good that she fooled Alyce. I just flat out don’t believe it. I believe she did it for the money and fame period. Karma is a bitch though because my sources tell me that things have not been great for Alyce since her time on the stand at the Stabby Einstein trial.

Kirk Nurmi: Dig that because it will probably be the last time I refer to him by his given name. I have been giving Nurmi a lot of thought. Kirk worked at the public defenders office when this case first came up. They are overworked and very seriously underpaid for what they have to do there. they also do not have a choice of whether they do or do not take a client. If you are the next lawyer up, whatever case comes in it is yours, no matter how bad of a case it is, or how guilty you know your client to be or how much of a pain in the ass they turn into. Mr. Nurmi has been trying to get away from Stabby almost since inception as her council of record. That speaks volumes. He knows she is lying, he knows that to allow her to do some of the things she wanted to do would be knowingly suborning perjury which can lead to disbarment, he knows she is a psychopath and he has still tried to offer the best defense that he could. He has worked hard for an ungrateful, hateful, spiteful bitch because that was his job. I dislike his style as an attorney, I dislike the way he seemed to be enjoying some of the more salacious parts of the testimony, I hate the way he seemed to be mocking the prosecution at times, but I feel very, very bad for Kirk Nurmi. I know he is going to be glad when this trial is over and I hope that he never has another one like it. One of these is enough.

Sometimes Judge Stephens. I started out liking Judge Stephens alright. I thought she was giving the defense a little too much latitude sometimes, but she seemed fairly no nonsense and I always appreciate that in a Judge. I loved when she rolled her eyes, I loved when you could tell she was not buying the big bag of horseshit that Stabby was selling. I loved that she knew it was obvious and she didn’t care. Then all the sealed this and sealed that and ex-parte motions and media blackouts started and I lost whatever respect I had for the sometimes Judge. There is a ton of appealable issues in this trial. In my opinion, blacking out the media after allowing it during the first trial is like holding up a giant sign saying I fucked up and you didn’t get a fair trial. Extreme stupidity in my opinion.

There are your Stabby Updates for the evening my lovelies. The real fun and games should hopefully begin tomorrow.

 

If you enjoy my blog please consider donating to ensure content.  All donations are greatly appreciated


Varmt News Network

It's the Internet.

peskyvarmt

Just another WordPress.com site

Asleep in Left Field-My Life

4 out of 5 Friends recommend this WordPress.com site

Out in left field

(Totally fictional) Drama Queen Stories

CALLS FOR JUSTICE

sometimes, there are monsters walking amongst us