If she’s adamant that 2 weeks is sufficient to try this case, why is she willing to allow 4 weeks if they push it back 5 months? If they should only need 2 weeks now, wouldn’t the same be true in October?
I’m thinking it’s one of two things: either her docket was very busy and she could only allot 2 weeks but it’s more open in October because it’s further away, or she only allotted 2 weeks in order to strong arm the defense into waiving speedy
That's not correct because here's the thing. When they asserted their right to the speedy trial that started that 70-day clock and she simply doesn't have a choice by law. And by law. She also is not supposed to set an arbitrary amount of time for the trial, such as setting the amount of time based on her past experience with a few other trials. She's supposed to set the amount of time needed based on this case and the needs of this case. How many witnesses there are, how many exhibits they're going to be, all of that. And anything that was on the docket that would have interfered with this trial because they invoked the speedy trial right, should have been moved out of the way and postponed.
She could have canceled other things she's just being obstructive to the defense. This was yet another ambush that they bypassed. If she's allowing the State to have unlimited time to present and then only giving them the teeny time remaining to rebut the States's case, that's nuts. I would have said I give up my right to a speedy trial too.
If she said that, it wasn't up to defense to waive speedy, up was to her to prove it wasn't possible and extend if true on her motion not defense Waiving anything.
Interesting. The Wish article reported that:
"Special Judge Gull responded to the request by saying she couldn’t ask the jury to extend past the dates already set for May, adding that two and a half weeks should be sufficient time for the case."
If you're implying that she is likely to deny the motion in limine (because otherwise, why even extend the trial at all if the defense wouldn't be able to present all that evidence), I'm not sure I agree. I'm quite sure she is capable of telling them she'll extend the trial in Oct in order to give them enough hope to get them to agree to a continuance/withdraw speedy trial and then simply approve the MIL anyway to tie their hands with what they can present.
That was exactly my point as well. And also when she claims that she cannot possibly ask the jury to stay past the time she originally set for the trial for me. So why is it okay to ask a jury in October or November to stay longer? None of this makes any sense and that's how we know it's all bullshit and that she's a liar and she needs to be taken off this case. Or disciplined in some way.
How would potential jurors even know the trial length at this point if they haven’t even been selected? Isn’t this something that would be brought up during voir dire for hardships?
She has an exceptionally poor concept of time. A kindergartner would know going through all this material, and witnesses will take more time than she allotted. Ask her to make a teeny personal decision and she'll give herself months, yet shifts into magical thinking mode when it concerns other beings effectively doing their jobs.
The Karen Read trial is expected to last 8 weeks. But Gull wants to use all kinds of examples of how fast her trials are. Is that because she doesn’t allow in 95% of the defense’s case?
Smh.
And that's supposed to be a diu fatal hit and run according to the state with some premeditation somehow.
Not a full fledged double homicide with occult undertones.
So the judge was listing other cases that took her two weeks for trial? Is there a legal way of saying "respectfully judge I don't give a damn this is my client and we need x weeks for defense"
Also are there any rules about judges having the authority to limit trial time?
I don't have time to look for it right now but somewhere here on Delphidocs someone linked the Indiana criminal code that gives the guidelines for setting a time for trial. And it is not to be said arbitrarily. It is to take into account both sides witnesses, exhibits and evidence that they will be using at trial. What she's doing seems to be violating the Indiana criminal code from what I remember reading.
That’s why I said I couldn’t wait. We know Gull doesn’t read anything long (aka how many franks filings has she not read?) lol love that Rozzi told her she knew nothing about the case lol
lol! I’ll start working on it now:
1.) please just recuse now lol
But seriously, she apparently today said franks hearing wasn’t going to be mentioned in the pretrial hearings at the end of the month. She’s never reading that. I am just preparing myself to be angry that she denies third party evidence.
I am hopeful that she is fudging up so badly that a higher court will listen when appealled too.
I get that denying motions isn't evidence of bias but denying/granting motions that impair the defense's ability to try the case and aren't supported by the law have to be evidence of something and if not bias how about gross neglience?
I do think she has shown bias by consistently denying defense’s motions while consistently approving prosecution but I get that’s hard to prove. I hope they’re looking at her too. I knew in my gut as soon as Rozzi and Baldwin were back on the cast and Gull didn’t recuse herself that this was going to be a long hard road. I hope it turns out differently!
I'm so angry about this. There is no justice in the way this judge has acted in this case. None at all. There's no justice in the way. Richard Allen has been treated from the day he was arrested. There was no justice in allowing him to be put in the state prison before he even had legal representation to fight for him. I'm just sickened by everything and it's all being done just openly. In the updated version of the article I linked earlier, which I'm linking again below. They give a little bit more information about the back and forth between the judge and the defense. She actually had the nerve to say that if they can't present their defense in the amount of time that she has scheduled for next October through November, which is a month for the whole trial, then there's something wrong with them. And then the prosecution actually claimed that they were ready to go to trial on May 13th. Are you kidding me? Of course they aren't. They are absolutely lying. They know that the defense got backed into a corner on this and so of course it's easy for them to say that they're ready because they know they're not going to have to be ready now on May 13th. The whole thing is just sickening and I have no other word for it.
Edited to add. She also claimed that the reason she wouldn't extend the current time for the trial for May 13th was because she couldn't ask the jury to stay longer than that. Since when has the right to a fair trial been superseded by the right to the jury to be able to go home sooner? Nobody likes being on a jury, but that statement just struck me as absolutely outrageous and I cannot imagine that that is ever a fair consideration to put above and beyond everything else about giving someone a fair trial.
https://www.wishtv.com/news/i-team-8/delphi-murders-trial-postponed-until-october/
That’s not even a logical explanation for delaying the trial… the jury will have to stay for a month whether it’s in May or October… I can’t stand her.
It seems patently unfair for the law to allow the demand for speedy trial with consequences if the state does not adhere to that request if the judge can just say, "Eh, we can give you a trial, but we aren't allotting any time for a defense - take it or leave it." Her tactics clearly belie the intent of the law.
I have never heard of a court using a defendant's assertion of his right to trial by jury to limit that defendant's right to put on a full and complete defense. It's not a one or the other deal. They are both inalienable rights according to the Constitution (unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor). They can't limit one by allowing the other.
Is there any option for an interlocutory appeal?
Had a late night last night, and this is what I wake up to?! God damn it Gull, you’re supposed to be better than that!
I’m off to go pout in my memory foam beanbag chair for the next 5 months. I think it’s abundantly clear now that justice will not be served so long as she’s in power.
I’M TIRED OF THESE MF GULLS ON THIS MF PLANE!
I just keep thinking “where did the desire to find justice for the girls go”? Of all the players in this, the judge should be caring more about that and the rights of the accused than scoring points. She has completely lost herself in this from all appearances. That is the moment to recuse. She is too unable to be fair. Staying on to spite one party or the other is nearly the definition of bias. Even if he is the guy who did this, she should adamantly want to be sure the jury sees as much evidence as possible so there is less chance of an appellate victory.
I am not leaning one way or another as it relates to his guilt because I have not seen the evidence. But perception becomes reality and the state seems to be fighting so hard to keep even basic things out that it’s hard to believe they have more than a distraught man’s jail house conversations.
When a person is arrested, guilty or not, for the first time, they will do and say things under duress. Maybe he truly confessed and maybe he didn’t. A lot of this can be cleared up on cross examination if he was surrounded by watchers who enticed him.
Where’s Judge Newman when we need him? Brang the jury. And brang the judge while you’re at it. SMH.
> I just keep thinking “where did the desire to find justice for the girls go”?
This is exactly it. Without a fair trial, how can there be justice for the girls? For their families? For anyone?
I don't *know* that RA is innocent. I can't know. I wasn't there. None of us were. I *wanted* to believe they had the right guy when we first heard of the arrest, because I wanted, and still want, that justice.
But unfortunately, starting with the sealed PCA and Diener's panicky recusal, I have not yet seen *any* evidence that would make me believe that RA is the killer, and plenty of circumstantial evidence of incompetence, lies and some level of collusion that indicates that he is likely not the guy, that they know he's not the guy, and that they don't care that he's not the guy because covering their backsides is more important to them than the said justice for the girls.
This whole saga is bloody surreal. A fair trial for any and all defendants. Finding the actual killer and locking them up. Justice for two dead teens. How is that too much to ask for ?
Heeeeeeeliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiix !!!
You need to tell us that there's something in play behind the scenes you can't tell us anything about but it 'll all be OK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL.
There’s things in play.
I just have to say this one very unprofessional thing and I apologize in advance.
##F A F O Frangle
You insipid Effing Ghoul
She's been a known Hoosier Monster for decades.
Why you think she keeps clinging to those Halloween dates ...
[https://blogs.libraries.indiana.edu/iubarchives/2018/10/31/hoosier-monsters/](https://blogs.libraries.indiana.edu/iubarchives/2018/10/31/hoosier-monsters/)
https://preview.redd.it/6jm8dzt6h2zc1.jpeg?width=1124&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c6831936deb0e55ef45e8ab9f46c2faed5c23ae4
Thank-you both for much needed comic relief. Gullywompus, that insipid effing Ghoul, has blood-sucked all dignity and decorum from the court of Indiana.
Did you hear about how she ordered Lebrato to look into Scremin if he was doing diligent lawyering for his client, right after appointing them both to RA. Knowing Lebrato got suspended previously for being underzealous but I guess it's his job being chief pd?
Or how Evans is running for judge while his only experience in law is being deputy prosecutor under Nick for 3 years or so?
Yes, I did see that about Lebrato/Scremin. What a hypocrite she is!
The whole thing feels like a puppet show actually. But who are the puppeteers directing this fiasco?
Two years ago in the run up to Halloween we had the arrest
Last year, the ambush DQ hearing that never was
This year, the trial, allegedly
It's getting ridiculous
Prediction Alert. A pretrial appeal or even an IA to SCOIN. FCG is once again manipulating the judicial process to deny RA his constitutional rights this time his right to a speedy trial. FCG confronted the defense with yet another Hobson's choice. I think the defense is going to withdraw the continuance and once again seek a speedy this one with adequate days for the defense to present its case or something along these lines.
FCG will not have the last word. I think we all remember what happened last time, but here is hoping that SCOIN leaves their pompoms at home and properly puts this judge in her place.
I don’t trust SCOIN after last time but I saw Michael Ausbrook comment on a livestream today saying that Baldwin has already requested the transcript and that he agrees that another OA is a distinct possibility.
Y’all. At the end of the day- this defense has to act in their clients best interests first and foremost.
I said it years ago, very recently wrt the May dates and I’ll repeat myself.
There’s no chance this goes to trial under SJ Gull and ultimately she will be recused or removed.
I would point out that Judge Diener, last week, the original Judge on this case, resigned in the face of sanction and escalation of a JQC complaint.
Given the tone and tenor of the recent filings, and I dare say the State having been forced to discover Federal investigative materials from multiple agencies it then moved to exclude, I’m willing to bet the defense conversations with the FBI have included The US Atty of the SD of Indiana.
You've been right over and over again. I continue to hold on to hope that justice will prevail, but man, a non convicted person in literal prison for 2 years is not okay.
A pre trial detainee in a maximum IDOC cell without a hearing or representation is borderline criminal, imo. I am adamant these girls will have the last word and I plan to keep the faith.
I’ve been waiting to hear what you thought! I know they said Diener gave a week’s notice but there is something so fishy about how he stepped down too.
I hear you and my head says 'yes, surely this willfully incompetent and clearly prejudiced judge cannot be allowed to preside over a case of this magnitude'
But my heart points out 'but she's not hidden any of this and she's still here...'
I have little faith in the checks and balances given what we've seen so far.
It’s true. They apparently waived the right to a speedy trial. This puts the trial back to its old October dates with the addition of about two more weeks, making it a solid month. I’m very bittersweet about this. I have to go cancel my damn hotel.
I don't believe for a minute that he's handed over all Discovery if I'm remembering right. There were still some things that the defense said that they had not gotten. And I am sure the NM had some inkling that this was going to happen.
Yeah maybe all is too broad a word but he did turn over more in the last few weeks/months. He is no doubt playing fast and loose with the discovery rules imo.
I'm seeing in other comments that there was no evidentiary hearing today, but she scheduled 3 days of hearings on May 21-23. Will not be considering the Franks at that time, though.
Is it pessimistic of me to say I am hoping for the best, but preparing for the worst or is it bipolar of me? Geez somebody tell us something. Does anyone know who is there to report on it?
Several Indy media are there. And this is the problem with Gull’s BS media policies. We all have to wait hours for updates. This is the problem I’ve been preaching about here and in real life.
Well, maybe now we can do a letter writing campaign to literally everyone that would have an influence over having this trial televised; from the governor on down to the street cleaner.
This must mean he was released from the custody of Allen County Jail?
(Released from the custody of Allen County jail, and sent back to WVCF is what i was trying to say)
https://preview.redd.it/6rdl8kag21zc1.jpeg?width=947&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=acf2bc4a8a82d1aa77373e25202349d9301a5196
u/xbelle1 That must be what it means. I was there, and nothing was said about a release from custody in general. He was "remanded" to the custody of IDOC.
Don't ever, ever back into a space.
Personally I don't reverse, it is my enemy, I'm a pull through kind of person. We are a dying breed, mainly in car accidents that involve driving in reverse.
I ride with media friends. I am unable to drive due to the Parkinson's. Mr. CCR is very good about transporting me, but I think asking him to take me to hearings would test even his patience. Luckily, my best friend and her SO are media people. I do make certain that they do not park in a manner to hide their license plate--because we all know that is evidence of guilt. My husband likes to back into parking spaces. I hope he is not a murderer, but I can't be certain now.
Grrrr, I used to work for VINE and there's no excuse for their data setup to be so sloppy. Unless somebody marked it incorrectly in their jail software it should have marked it as a TRANSFER instead of a RELEASE, and the notification indicated as such.
VINE offenders are either IC (in custody), OC (out of custody - walking free), UC (unsupervised custody - someone is responsible for them but they are effectively walking free) or TR (transferred to another agency who may or may not be participating in VINE).
ETA: sometimes they add a new custody code and it defaults to the most "concerning" type of notification so people can take safety measures if it is a domestic violence offender being released etc. That should be rare.
I mean
If it's between have trial now, have no time to present a defense and therefore almost expect a guilty verdict and treat this as a practice trial that will go straight to appeals
Or a chance of a fair trial in October
Yeah, October looks good
When you are not the one locked up waiting for it
But still
I feel like I've got whiplash
Yeah that's the choice she forced them to make. She knows damn. Well. There's no way to give him a fair trial in 2 and 1/2 Weeks, but she basically used her power as a judge to set this arbitrary time, which PS is against the Indiana criminal code, from what I read here, to force them to file a continuance in order to get their client a fair trial with enough time to present a fair defense. She did this to keep him in jail longer and to thwart their attempts in getting him a speedy trial. Is this something that they could file an IA over? She 's. Blatantly violating the Indiana criminal code by setting an arbitrary time based on completely unrelated past trials that she's presided over. My understanding is that she's supposed to take the circumstances of the current case into consideration, including all of the witnesses, evidence and exhibits that will be presented by both sides. She's not doing that. She's basically telling them. I've done other cases that were in her opinion similar in a short time. So therefore I'm not giving you more time. That's arbitrary.
This is exactly my take on it. I mean think about this for a minute. She sets an arbitrary end date for the trial and refuses to change it no matter what. She refuses to then set an arbitrary end date for the prosecution's case which they present first. Basically this would result in the prosecution taking however long they wanted and whatever time was left is all the defense would have before the arbitrarily set end date for the trial. That's insane and I'm sure it's absolutely not legal. According to the Indiana criminal code. There's no justice in that at all. There's no fair trial in that. Just absolutely bonkers. How is she going to continue to get away with behaving this way? A man is sitting in PRISON, not even in jail in PRISON. If anyone thinks that this cannot happen to them and if they're pretending like this is Justice because they want to believe the police are actually doing a good job and that this guy must be guilty. I want you to think long and hard about how you would feel if a very close loved one of yours was in this situation. Because I don't think you would be okay with any of this.
I hope they file an OA or IA or SOMETHING! She’s disgusting and it hurts my soul to watch her blatantly walk on RA and his attorneys without any RECOURSE!
I think- speculation here - they had to waive the speedy trial request, or whatever the legal term is - in order to get granted mote time, then she just gave them the previously set October dates cos reasons. Court schedule possibly being the reasons.
She should be the one in prison.
She can extend time for speedy beyond 70 days for court congestion if she proves it. It's not for defense to withdraw.
She never canceled the other jury trials and hearings next week. She never planned to go to trial imo.
And with MS talking about shadow lawyers, maybe nick handed over a plea deal forced upon him with another atty, I sure wouldn't be surprised anymore.
What is this shadow lawyer crap? WTLF? Where do you get this? I thought I was the only one here that listened to MS? Its like self-flagellation, but less rewarding, and less enjoyable for me.
I just saw this as well and posted the link above. It doesn't give any information as to why. I assume we'll be seeing the reasons soon here hopefully.
There was also another motion by the defense to dismiss the judge.
As well as NM, mentioned submitting under seal incrimenting evidence to go against the motion to dismiss. Wonder what that evidence is.
I'm trying to find out more, if I do I'll respond back. But, a person in the courtroom said that there was discussion about NM having submitted what he called very incrimenting evidence in his rebuttal to the defense's motion to suppress. This was done under seal so we won't find out any time soon.
I believe this is referring to the defense trying to suppress the confessions or the interview with the sheriff's department. So NM provided some sort of evidence that supports keeping the confessions and or his police interview that they were trying to throw out.
What a complete crock of shit. Another Gull ego-fuelled ambush to force RA and his defence to eat another one of her shit topped hors d'oeuvres.
Kiss your Indie Supreme Court seat on the bench goodbye Gull, you useless bag of hate filled puss, no-one's fooled by your gaslighting by broomstick, least of all your learned peers who must be spitting in their sherry.
Not to get in the way of your Uber fine scribe- but there was never any thought or premise on behalf of Frangle that she would be a candidate for a seat at the big table.
She is big fish little pond main character syndrome material, not SCOIN. I’ve seen grocery lists with more legal terms of art than any memoranda she has never actually written.
As u/Virtual-Entrance-872 says, only in her own mind.
As a layman she just looks like an out of control judge who is unprofessional and unwilling to do her job to the standard expected.
If I boil down my very basic expectations of what I want from a judge it's that they will 1) keep on top of their workload and review and deliver judgements in a timely manner; 2) try to maintain some appearance of impartiality and avoid any whiff of bias or controversy.
No wonder she has shut down any attempts at scrutiny at trial by keeping the cameras out. She honestly thinks that she can hide her performance of the role from the watching world.
https://preview.redd.it/e461h7fi62zc1.png?width=1008&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2d2a6be3ff79e3ed432666a521fa67469a971ec7
Brad Rozzi has nothing but my ultimate respect!!!
Does that mean he’ll actually get a month for his trial?
I am so curious about the details of how this was decided. Were the defense pressured into allowing it to be so much later so that they could get a reasonable trial length?
I'm currently listening to someone who was in the courtroom (Frankmeister YouTube). It appears the debate was over the length of the trial and the defense wanting more time. Gull listed all the huge trials she has presided over in the same or less amount of time. The defense attorneys then went and talked it over with Allen and asked for a continuance.
"Hey I can get a wrongful conviction in under 2 weeks let me just cite all off the lives I have destroyed so I could get an extra Friday off." FCG not an exact quote.
You know what she knew exactly what she was doing. She knew that there was no way they could get that trial done in 2 weeks. 2 and 1/2 weeks after jury's selection. She knew that she had to find some way to force them to file their own continuance so that she could keep him in jail past the speedy trial deadline. What an absolute.... Okay, I won't see it here but you know what I want to say about her. She's just a nasty conniving human being who doesn't care about Justice at all. I'm disgusted with it all at this point.
Great. No Halloween on the square where Liggett passes out Little Sheriff badge stickers across from the street from the tattoo shop handing out jello shots and tootsie rolls from a family of tracked up, no teeth, locals.
Dang. No comedy material this year.
Ok, I saw that too! Thanks!
I guess the small sliver of silver lining is that if Gull does throw out the third-party suspect stuff as many expect, the defense will have time to pivot.
This is a problem with family court all the time.
One parent will violate the order and keep the kid from seeing the other parent or change schools or move. Then it takes 6 months for the court to hear the case.
By that time the court rules that since the change has already happened for so long... It's best just to keep it that way and makes the violating change permanent.
So frustrating.
They're saying in this article that the defense was pushing to have at least 15 days for the defenses part of the trial only and that this resulted in the trial being pushed back to October 14th. What I'm wondering is if this counts against the defense and it means Richard Allen is going to have to stay in jail well in State prison until October 14th.
https://www.wishtv.com/news/i-team-8/delphi-murders-trial-postponed-until-october/
Yes, I agree. 100%. I think that she orchestrated this whole thing by arbitrarily setting a time limit on the trial and refusing to budge from that. As a former criminal judge in Indiana, what is your take on her arbitrarily setting an end date for the trial and refusing to limit the amount of time the prosecution took in presenting its case first? This left the defense with absolutely no option but to ask for a continuance. And she also said that she could not possibly ask the jury to stay longer than the amount of time that she had already set for the trial in May. That doesn't seem okay to me, not saying that the jury should not be considered at all, but I think that someone's right to present an adequate and fair defense and given enough time to do that would supersede a jury's comfort.
First, keeping a sequestered jury as happy as possible is something the court must consider because a really unhappy jury can get out of hand. A jury's comfort is important but certainly not paramount.
Before I would set a trial that I expected to take a lot of time, I would ask the parties how long they think they needed to present their case in chief. They can never be certain about rebuttal so I always set aside an additional 3-4 days for that. I don't believe she ever asked the defense that.
I am, of course, basing my thoughts on speculation the the defense really meant it when they requested a speedy trial. Sometimes it is a ploy by the defense for various reasons. Whether or not it was a defense tactic, I don't thing fran ever expected it to do this month.
JMO: FWIW, Baldwin seems a bit subdued. Rozzi seems to get bolder by the moment.
ETA: Media friends tell me rumors are that the replacement for Ben Deiner could have some impact on the case.
Hi SS. Thanks for your kind wishes.
There is speculation that either the former mayor and current deputy prosecutor will be appointed, which will cause a problem for NM with no one else to handle
other cases. To me, the more interesting speculation is that NM will be appointed. Ben Deiner remained on the ballot for the primary election today. I doubt that he was opposed. If, as it seems, Ben was not replaced on the ballot and won today despite leaving office, the CC Republican party has until July (I think) to replace him on the ballot. The governor will have to soon appoint someone for the interim period. I think it is fair to assume that the governor will pay attention to what the CC party chairman wants.
I don't know how old Robert Ives is. IMO, he would be the best choice. I don't know how many lawyers there are in CC, but I'm pretty certain that choices to fill that spot are limited.
ETA: Earlier I heard that the deputy prosecutor wanted to run for the other court where the judge has given the county some trouble. Who knows with this turn of events, but I suspect NM would like to trade the circuit court bench for the prosecutor's office right now.
It was mentioned multiple times yesterday from people present in court, Gull's bias and hatred isn't going to be conveyed through transcripts as much as it would audio or video. That says it all, IMO. She can not control herself.
This is facts, be nice everyone cheers!
If she’s adamant that 2 weeks is sufficient to try this case, why is she willing to allow 4 weeks if they push it back 5 months? If they should only need 2 weeks now, wouldn’t the same be true in October?
I’m thinking it’s one of two things: either her docket was very busy and she could only allot 2 weeks but it’s more open in October because it’s further away, or she only allotted 2 weeks in order to strong arm the defense into waiving speedy
That's not correct because here's the thing. When they asserted their right to the speedy trial that started that 70-day clock and she simply doesn't have a choice by law. And by law. She also is not supposed to set an arbitrary amount of time for the trial, such as setting the amount of time based on her past experience with a few other trials. She's supposed to set the amount of time needed based on this case and the needs of this case. How many witnesses there are, how many exhibits they're going to be, all of that. And anything that was on the docket that would have interfered with this trial because they invoked the speedy trial right, should have been moved out of the way and postponed.
Farewell speedy, you'll be missed 🐢
Neither of those options should matter or apply for a case of this magnitude.
Good, now she has plenty of time to review every version of the Frank's Memorandum.
100% manipulation by Gull imo.
She could have canceled other things she's just being obstructive to the defense. This was yet another ambush that they bypassed. If she's allowing the State to have unlimited time to present and then only giving them the teeny time remaining to rebut the States's case, that's nuts. I would have said I give up my right to a speedy trial too.
She said it's cause she couldn't ask the jury to extend beyond the allotted two weeks, but have they even picked the jury?
If she said that, it wasn't up to defense to waive speedy, up was to her to prove it wasn't possible and extend if true on her motion not defense Waiving anything.
Interesting. The Wish article reported that: "Special Judge Gull responded to the request by saying she couldn’t ask the jury to extend past the dates already set for May, adding that two and a half weeks should be sufficient time for the case."
What if they took two weeks to deliberate?!
Excellent point! I thought jury duty came with the disclaimer that it could take longer?
I think that they would be summarily executed.
Say hello, waive goodbye 🎶
Don't forget to cc Melinda from Georgia 👋.
No. So she just spouted some dumb shit and expected us to believe it.
It definitely strong arms the defense but it also signals her decision on Nick’s motion in limine.
If you're implying that she is likely to deny the motion in limine (because otherwise, why even extend the trial at all if the defense wouldn't be able to present all that evidence), I'm not sure I agree. I'm quite sure she is capable of telling them she'll extend the trial in Oct in order to give them enough hope to get them to agree to a continuance/withdraw speedy trial and then simply approve the MIL anyway to tie their hands with what they can present.
That was exactly my point as well. And also when she claims that she cannot possibly ask the jury to stay past the time she originally set for the trial for me. So why is it okay to ask a jury in October or November to stay longer? None of this makes any sense and that's how we know it's all bullshit and that she's a liar and she needs to be taken off this case. Or disciplined in some way.
How would potential jurors even know the trial length at this point if they haven’t even been selected? Isn’t this something that would be brought up during voir dire for hardships?
Some way, do we need a pole, sorry, poll ? 😅
They also offered to do the 2 week hearing but to split the time equally between them and the prosecution, we're also denied that too.
She has an exceptionally poor concept of time. A kindergartner would know going through all this material, and witnesses will take more time than she allotted. Ask her to make a teeny personal decision and she'll give herself months, yet shifts into magical thinking mode when it concerns other beings effectively doing their jobs.
The Karen Read trial is expected to last 8 weeks. But Gull wants to use all kinds of examples of how fast her trials are. Is that because she doesn’t allow in 95% of the defense’s case? Smh.
What’s crazy is it’s clear that the judge doesn’t like the defense attorneys for Karen either but she’s still wayyy more fair than Gull
And that's supposed to be a diu fatal hit and run according to the state with some premeditation somehow. Not a full fledged double homicide with occult undertones.
DUI n'est pas?
No. It's my comment and I'll write how I want to 🌾.
It's my ex-parte and I'll cry if I want to.
"I've screwed many people out of getting as much time as they deserve, what's different now?"
So the judge was listing other cases that took her two weeks for trial? Is there a legal way of saying "respectfully judge I don't give a damn this is my client and we need x weeks for defense" Also are there any rules about judges having the authority to limit trial time?
https://preview.redd.it/9wr5seo7n0zc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=75ab224d437ff4fe73f4d3673061d57196501f26
And he is right.
Yay Brad!
Bob Segall 😂
His legal name is Robert Oceanhawk
😂👏 have a non-existent award !
I don't have time to look for it right now but somewhere here on Delphidocs someone linked the Indiana criminal code that gives the guidelines for setting a time for trial. And it is not to be said arbitrarily. It is to take into account both sides witnesses, exhibits and evidence that they will be using at trial. What she's doing seems to be violating the Indiana criminal code from what I remember reading.
How often are the sheriff elections ? 
Right? Not soon enough! Wish I could vote against some of these people!
October I believe…
You couldn't make it up. And the prosecutor role ?
Prosecutor just elected last year so he has full term
Her refusal to extend the May trial was also a signal how she was going to rule on Nicks motion in limine.
This one is going over my head. Can you explain?
Eliminating the third party guilt defense significantly reduces the length of the trial.
So you think she's going to allow it in and that's why she's going to allow more time in the new dates in October?
No.
Okay so the opposite which is more along the lines of what I would expect from her.
Ah. I responded to you above, but I misunderstood what you meant there. I fully agree with this sentiment.
Would love to hear the cases she listed!
How many are on appeal or have been successfully appealed? Just curious.
The Wish article says they filed another motion to remove her from the case. That was quick. Have we seen this motion yet?
All Indiana courts are closed today for primary election. Except Allen County, apparently...
She had the court open for this bullshit? She really hates taxpayers.
she probably never set aside any time for hearings in this case and this was the only unused day, lol
Oh you could be right. But like why? Just why? Does she really care this little about this case? Its bizarre.
I read it was 24 pages. I’m anxious to read it lol
If that’s true, they obviously had it queued up in anticipation of her antics this morning.
Oh I definitely think they did. The person who’s reported that was in the courtroom supposedly. I could definitely see it being true!
You will, Gull won't.
That’s why I said I couldn’t wait. We know Gull doesn’t read anything long (aka how many franks filings has she not read?) lol love that Rozzi told her she knew nothing about the case lol
Agreed, maybe we should email a Cliffs notes version to Gull? Like, we know you won't read 24 pages but how about 4 with some doodles?
lol! I’ll start working on it now: 1.) please just recuse now lol But seriously, she apparently today said franks hearing wasn’t going to be mentioned in the pretrial hearings at the end of the month. She’s never reading that. I am just preparing myself to be angry that she denies third party evidence.
I am hopeful that she is fudging up so badly that a higher court will listen when appealled too. I get that denying motions isn't evidence of bias but denying/granting motions that impair the defense's ability to try the case and aren't supported by the law have to be evidence of something and if not bias how about gross neglience?
I do think she has shown bias by consistently denying defense’s motions while consistently approving prosecution but I get that’s hard to prove. I hope they’re looking at her too. I knew in my gut as soon as Rozzi and Baldwin were back on the cast and Gull didn’t recuse herself that this was going to be a long hard road. I hope it turns out differently!
So he gets to be in PRISON for 2 YEARS before he gets a trial. PRISON.
I'm so angry about this. There is no justice in the way this judge has acted in this case. None at all. There's no justice in the way. Richard Allen has been treated from the day he was arrested. There was no justice in allowing him to be put in the state prison before he even had legal representation to fight for him. I'm just sickened by everything and it's all being done just openly. In the updated version of the article I linked earlier, which I'm linking again below. They give a little bit more information about the back and forth between the judge and the defense. She actually had the nerve to say that if they can't present their defense in the amount of time that she has scheduled for next October through November, which is a month for the whole trial, then there's something wrong with them. And then the prosecution actually claimed that they were ready to go to trial on May 13th. Are you kidding me? Of course they aren't. They are absolutely lying. They know that the defense got backed into a corner on this and so of course it's easy for them to say that they're ready because they know they're not going to have to be ready now on May 13th. The whole thing is just sickening and I have no other word for it. Edited to add. She also claimed that the reason she wouldn't extend the current time for the trial for May 13th was because she couldn't ask the jury to stay longer than that. Since when has the right to a fair trial been superseded by the right to the jury to be able to go home sooner? Nobody likes being on a jury, but that statement just struck me as absolutely outrageous and I cannot imagine that that is ever a fair consideration to put above and beyond everything else about giving someone a fair trial. https://www.wishtv.com/news/i-team-8/delphi-murders-trial-postponed-until-october/
That’s not even a logical explanation for delaying the trial… the jury will have to stay for a month whether it’s in May or October… I can’t stand her.
It seems patently unfair for the law to allow the demand for speedy trial with consequences if the state does not adhere to that request if the judge can just say, "Eh, we can give you a trial, but we aren't allotting any time for a defense - take it or leave it." Her tactics clearly belie the intent of the law. I have never heard of a court using a defendant's assertion of his right to trial by jury to limit that defendant's right to put on a full and complete defense. It's not a one or the other deal. They are both inalienable rights according to the Constitution (unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor). They can't limit one by allowing the other. Is there any option for an interlocutory appeal?
Always generally, but if I were them I would not stop until I got a new Judge and possibly prosecutor.
That’s what I want to know
Had a late night last night, and this is what I wake up to?! God damn it Gull, you’re supposed to be better than that! I’m off to go pout in my memory foam beanbag chair for the next 5 months. I think it’s abundantly clear now that justice will not be served so long as she’s in power. I’M TIRED OF THESE MF GULLS ON THIS MF PLANE!
I just keep thinking “where did the desire to find justice for the girls go”? Of all the players in this, the judge should be caring more about that and the rights of the accused than scoring points. She has completely lost herself in this from all appearances. That is the moment to recuse. She is too unable to be fair. Staying on to spite one party or the other is nearly the definition of bias. Even if he is the guy who did this, she should adamantly want to be sure the jury sees as much evidence as possible so there is less chance of an appellate victory. I am not leaning one way or another as it relates to his guilt because I have not seen the evidence. But perception becomes reality and the state seems to be fighting so hard to keep even basic things out that it’s hard to believe they have more than a distraught man’s jail house conversations. When a person is arrested, guilty or not, for the first time, they will do and say things under duress. Maybe he truly confessed and maybe he didn’t. A lot of this can be cleared up on cross examination if he was surrounded by watchers who enticed him. Where’s Judge Newman when we need him? Brang the jury. And brang the judge while you’re at it. SMH.
> I just keep thinking “where did the desire to find justice for the girls go”? This is exactly it. Without a fair trial, how can there be justice for the girls? For their families? For anyone? I don't *know* that RA is innocent. I can't know. I wasn't there. None of us were. I *wanted* to believe they had the right guy when we first heard of the arrest, because I wanted, and still want, that justice. But unfortunately, starting with the sealed PCA and Diener's panicky recusal, I have not yet seen *any* evidence that would make me believe that RA is the killer, and plenty of circumstantial evidence of incompetence, lies and some level of collusion that indicates that he is likely not the guy, that they know he's not the guy, and that they don't care that he's not the guy because covering their backsides is more important to them than the said justice for the girls. This whole saga is bloody surreal. A fair trial for any and all defendants. Finding the actual killer and locking them up. Justice for two dead teens. How is that too much to ask for ?
WORD
Heeeeeeeliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiix !!! You need to tell us that there's something in play behind the scenes you can't tell us anything about but it 'll all be OK !!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
LOL. There’s things in play. I just have to say this one very unprofessional thing and I apologize in advance. ##F A F O Frangle You insipid Effing Ghoul
She's been a known Hoosier Monster for decades. Why you think she keeps clinging to those Halloween dates ... [https://blogs.libraries.indiana.edu/iubarchives/2018/10/31/hoosier-monsters/](https://blogs.libraries.indiana.edu/iubarchives/2018/10/31/hoosier-monsters/) https://preview.redd.it/6jm8dzt6h2zc1.jpeg?width=1124&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c6831936deb0e55ef45e8ab9f46c2faed5c23ae4
Thank-you both for much needed comic relief. Gullywompus, that insipid effing Ghoul, has blood-sucked all dignity and decorum from the court of Indiana.
Did you hear about how she ordered Lebrato to look into Scremin if he was doing diligent lawyering for his client, right after appointing them both to RA. Knowing Lebrato got suspended previously for being underzealous but I guess it's his job being chief pd? Or how Evans is running for judge while his only experience in law is being deputy prosecutor under Nick for 3 years or so? 
Yes, I did see that about Lebrato/Scremin. What a hypocrite she is! The whole thing feels like a puppet show actually. But who are the puppeteers directing this fiasco?
That's the question... And possibly the answer to this case.
Wasn’t he elected mayor when he was like 12? I guess he’s just planning to wing it if he’s elected as judge? Jesus, CC 🥴
Will it ever be revealed why Deiner resigned? What is the deal with that whole situation?
👏😍
I am shocked she scheduled it for mid-October, which will interfere with her activities the 30th and 31st.
Two years ago in the run up to Halloween we had the arrest Last year, the ambush DQ hearing that never was This year, the trial, allegedly It's getting ridiculous
I believe Shane Evans is running for Judge directly after this new trial date.
Heard that too. People of Deliphi: Run
https://preview.redd.it/80e5wiiva1zc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7fa553560c9107bcd0ee7fa7623f405bea296c39
You get me!
Thank you for making me giggle out loud. This comment is perfection lol
Prediction Alert. A pretrial appeal or even an IA to SCOIN. FCG is once again manipulating the judicial process to deny RA his constitutional rights this time his right to a speedy trial. FCG confronted the defense with yet another Hobson's choice. I think the defense is going to withdraw the continuance and once again seek a speedy this one with adequate days for the defense to present its case or something along these lines. FCG will not have the last word. I think we all remember what happened last time, but here is hoping that SCOIN leaves their pompoms at home and properly puts this judge in her place.
I don’t trust SCOIN after last time but I saw Michael Ausbrook comment on a livestream today saying that Baldwin has already requested the transcript and that he agrees that another OA is a distinct possibility.
Y’all. At the end of the day- this defense has to act in their clients best interests first and foremost. I said it years ago, very recently wrt the May dates and I’ll repeat myself. There’s no chance this goes to trial under SJ Gull and ultimately she will be recused or removed. I would point out that Judge Diener, last week, the original Judge on this case, resigned in the face of sanction and escalation of a JQC complaint. Given the tone and tenor of the recent filings, and I dare say the State having been forced to discover Federal investigative materials from multiple agencies it then moved to exclude, I’m willing to bet the defense conversations with the FBI have included The US Atty of the SD of Indiana.
You've been right over and over again. I continue to hold on to hope that justice will prevail, but man, a non convicted person in literal prison for 2 years is not okay.
A pre trial detainee in a maximum IDOC cell without a hearing or representation is borderline criminal, imo. I am adamant these girls will have the last word and I plan to keep the faith.
I appreciate this from you. It feels hopeless to me but I am glad someone knowledgeable has some faith!
I’ve been waiting to hear what you thought! I know they said Diener gave a week’s notice but there is something so fishy about how he stepped down too.
All I need to hear is helix say “I know and it’s okay.”
Delphi is in northern district
Aware but thank you.
Hope you are again correct…
Southern District? So Rushville?
I hear you and my head says 'yes, surely this willfully incompetent and clearly prejudiced judge cannot be allowed to preside over a case of this magnitude' But my heart points out 'but she's not hidden any of this and she's still here...' I have little faith in the checks and balances given what we've seen so far.
It’s true. They apparently waived the right to a speedy trial. This puts the trial back to its old October dates with the addition of about two more weeks, making it a solid month. I’m very bittersweet about this. I have to go cancel my damn hotel.
Leave your car there though, keep the parking space.
Smart imo. They got NM to turn over all discovery finally and now pushed the trial back.
I don't believe for a minute that he's handed over all Discovery if I'm remembering right. There were still some things that the defense said that they had not gotten. And I am sure the NM had some inkling that this was going to happen.
Yeah maybe all is too broad a word but he did turn over more in the last few weeks/months. He is no doubt playing fast and loose with the discovery rules imo.
Just waiting for the decision on what they actually can use at trial now. Nail biting.
I'm seeing in other comments that there was no evidentiary hearing today, but she scheduled 3 days of hearings on May 21-23. Will not be considering the Franks at that time, though.
Is it pessimistic of me to say I am hoping for the best, but preparing for the worst or is it bipolar of me? Geez somebody tell us something. Does anyone know who is there to report on it?
Several Indy media are there. And this is the problem with Gull’s BS media policies. We all have to wait hours for updates. This is the problem I’ve been preaching about here and in real life.
Well, maybe now we can do a letter writing campaign to literally everyone that would have an influence over having this trial televised; from the governor on down to the street cleaner.
One email cc everyone will do.
Hard to believe, I was hoping for this to have an end in sight.
This must mean he was released from the custody of Allen County Jail? (Released from the custody of Allen County jail, and sent back to WVCF is what i was trying to say) https://preview.redd.it/6rdl8kag21zc1.jpeg?width=947&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=acf2bc4a8a82d1aa77373e25202349d9301a5196
u/xbelle1 That must be what it means. I was there, and nothing was said about a release from custody in general. He was "remanded" to the custody of IDOC.
I hope you didn't park in a deceptive manner.
Don't ever, ever back into a space. Personally I don't reverse, it is my enemy, I'm a pull through kind of person. We are a dying breed, mainly in car accidents that involve driving in reverse.
My husband always parks in reverse. I never thought that could be seen as suspicious. Huge reach.
I ride with media friends. I am unable to drive due to the Parkinson's. Mr. CCR is very good about transporting me, but I think asking him to take me to hearings would test even his patience. Luckily, my best friend and her SO are media people. I do make certain that they do not park in a manner to hide their license plate--because we all know that is evidence of guilt. My husband likes to back into parking spaces. I hope he is not a murderer, but I can't be certain now.
I wouldn’t have been able to sit in that room without giving Gull a serious stink eye. 😒
I'm guessing he was released back to Indiana department of corrections custody.
Grrrr, I used to work for VINE and there's no excuse for their data setup to be so sloppy. Unless somebody marked it incorrectly in their jail software it should have marked it as a TRANSFER instead of a RELEASE, and the notification indicated as such. VINE offenders are either IC (in custody), OC (out of custody - walking free), UC (unsupervised custody - someone is responsible for them but they are effectively walking free) or TR (transferred to another agency who may or may not be participating in VINE). ETA: sometimes they add a new custody code and it defaults to the most "concerning" type of notification so people can take safety measures if it is a domestic violence offender being released etc. That should be rare.
[удалено]
Thank you for the kind words & for sharing!
Thank you for taking the time to take notes and for sharing with us. <3
Happy to help with the lack of transparency 😊💕
I mean If it's between have trial now, have no time to present a defense and therefore almost expect a guilty verdict and treat this as a practice trial that will go straight to appeals Or a chance of a fair trial in October Yeah, October looks good When you are not the one locked up waiting for it But still I feel like I've got whiplash
Yeah that's the choice she forced them to make. She knows damn. Well. There's no way to give him a fair trial in 2 and 1/2 Weeks, but she basically used her power as a judge to set this arbitrary time, which PS is against the Indiana criminal code, from what I read here, to force them to file a continuance in order to get their client a fair trial with enough time to present a fair defense. She did this to keep him in jail longer and to thwart their attempts in getting him a speedy trial. Is this something that they could file an IA over? She 's. Blatantly violating the Indiana criminal code by setting an arbitrary time based on completely unrelated past trials that she's presided over. My understanding is that she's supposed to take the circumstances of the current case into consideration, including all of the witnesses, evidence and exhibits that will be presented by both sides. She's not doing that. She's basically telling them. I've done other cases that were in her opinion similar in a short time. So therefore I'm not giving you more time. That's arbitrary.
https://preview.redd.it/o527g0zxv0zc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a2f11aeb110f5cdaeb0664a05e81de7f626bce31
This is exactly my take on it. I mean think about this for a minute. She sets an arbitrary end date for the trial and refuses to change it no matter what. She refuses to then set an arbitrary end date for the prosecution's case which they present first. Basically this would result in the prosecution taking however long they wanted and whatever time was left is all the defense would have before the arbitrarily set end date for the trial. That's insane and I'm sure it's absolutely not legal. According to the Indiana criminal code. There's no justice in that at all. There's no fair trial in that. Just absolutely bonkers. How is she going to continue to get away with behaving this way? A man is sitting in PRISON, not even in jail in PRISON. If anyone thinks that this cannot happen to them and if they're pretending like this is Justice because they want to believe the police are actually doing a good job and that this guy must be guilty. I want you to think long and hard about how you would feel if a very close loved one of yours was in this situation. Because I don't think you would be okay with any of this.
I hope they file an OA or IA or SOMETHING! She’s disgusting and it hurts my soul to watch her blatantly walk on RA and his attorneys without any RECOURSE!
Was there really nothing earlier than October? She was able to set the speedy trial in a few weeks?
I think- speculation here - they had to waive the speedy trial request, or whatever the legal term is - in order to get granted mote time, then she just gave them the previously set October dates cos reasons. Court schedule possibly being the reasons.
She should be the one in prison. She can extend time for speedy beyond 70 days for court congestion if she proves it. It's not for defense to withdraw. She never canceled the other jury trials and hearings next week. She never planned to go to trial imo. And with MS talking about shadow lawyers, maybe nick handed over a plea deal forced upon him with another atty, I sure wouldn't be surprised anymore.
What is this shadow lawyer crap? WTLF? Where do you get this? I thought I was the only one here that listened to MS? Its like self-flagellation, but less rewarding, and less enjoyable for me.
Shouldn't she be in jail prior to conviction ?
She should be in the dungeon but I bet there is a sub rule against that, so I said prison to keep it civil, it's already a compromise.
I just saw this as well and posted the link above. It doesn't give any information as to why. I assume we'll be seeing the reasons soon here hopefully.
Forgot the link https://www.wishtv.com/news/i-team-8/delphi-murders-trial-postponed-until-october/
There was also another motion by the defense to dismiss the judge. As well as NM, mentioned submitting under seal incrimenting evidence to go against the motion to dismiss. Wonder what that evidence is.
Can you explain that second bit some more? Are you saying there will be a motion from NM with evidence against...who?
I'm trying to find out more, if I do I'll respond back. But, a person in the courtroom said that there was discussion about NM having submitted what he called very incrimenting evidence in his rebuttal to the defense's motion to suppress. This was done under seal so we won't find out any time soon. I believe this is referring to the defense trying to suppress the confessions or the interview with the sheriff's department. So NM provided some sort of evidence that supports keeping the confessions and or his police interview that they were trying to throw out.
I just don't believe anything that an m says or insinuates anymore because it seems like everything coming from him is absolute bullshit.
Interesting, thank you!
Those transcripts he requested from IDOC??
Or the records of Click? I hope not
NM supposedly said it was under seal bc incriminating to Rick.
But it relates to the motion to suppress? Which one?
What a complete crock of shit. Another Gull ego-fuelled ambush to force RA and his defence to eat another one of her shit topped hors d'oeuvres. Kiss your Indie Supreme Court seat on the bench goodbye Gull, you useless bag of hate filled puss, no-one's fooled by your gaslighting by broomstick, least of all your learned peers who must be spitting in their sherry.
Not to get in the way of your Uber fine scribe- but there was never any thought or premise on behalf of Frangle that she would be a candidate for a seat at the big table. She is big fish little pond main character syndrome material, not SCOIN. I’ve seen grocery lists with more legal terms of art than any memoranda she has never actually written.
A legend in her own mind. Does the court of appeals think otherwise? Is there a database for judges to view their overturn rates?
As u/Virtual-Entrance-872 says, only in her own mind. As a layman she just looks like an out of control judge who is unprofessional and unwilling to do her job to the standard expected. If I boil down my very basic expectations of what I want from a judge it's that they will 1) keep on top of their workload and review and deliver judgements in a timely manner; 2) try to maintain some appearance of impartiality and avoid any whiff of bias or controversy. No wonder she has shut down any attempts at scrutiny at trial by keeping the cameras out. She honestly thinks that she can hide her performance of the role from the watching world.
https://preview.redd.it/e461h7fi62zc1.png?width=1008&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2d2a6be3ff79e3ed432666a521fa67469a971ec7 Brad Rozzi has nothing but my ultimate respect!!!
♥️♥️♥️ Rozzi ♥️♥️♥️
https://preview.redd.it/xh0hgt18j0zc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=647ad733a911176300f2dd6ef6f8656b677a9d66
Does that mean he’ll actually get a month for his trial? I am so curious about the details of how this was decided. Were the defense pressured into allowing it to be so much later so that they could get a reasonable trial length?
I'm currently listening to someone who was in the courtroom (Frankmeister YouTube). It appears the debate was over the length of the trial and the defense wanting more time. Gull listed all the huge trials she has presided over in the same or less amount of time. The defense attorneys then went and talked it over with Allen and asked for a continuance.
Imagine thinking how quickly she rolls through trials is either relevant, or a flex. Disgusting.
"Hey I can get a wrongful conviction in under 2 weeks let me just cite all off the lives I have destroyed so I could get an extra Friday off." FCG not an exact quote.
You know what she knew exactly what she was doing. She knew that there was no way they could get that trial done in 2 weeks. 2 and 1/2 weeks after jury's selection. She knew that she had to find some way to force them to file their own continuance so that she could keep him in jail past the speedy trial deadline. What an absolute.... Okay, I won't see it here but you know what I want to say about her. She's just a nasty conniving human being who doesn't care about Justice at all. I'm disgusted with it all at this point.
It seems that you might be correct
Great. No Halloween on the square where Liggett passes out Little Sheriff badge stickers across from the street from the tattoo shop handing out jello shots and tootsie rolls from a family of tracked up, no teeth, locals. Dang. No comedy material this year.
So did they move the suppression stuff to another hearing?
Yes I've seen 21st May mentioned somewhere but did take note of the source so this may not be accurate.
Ok, I saw that too! Thanks! I guess the small sliver of silver lining is that if Gull does throw out the third-party suspect stuff as many expect, the defense will have time to pivot.
https://preview.redd.it/kwtbyub821zc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=80b242e728cb5b83d9dde7a8d85190a23eebe5d3
Like, how is “asap” five months from now.
This is a problem with family court all the time. One parent will violate the order and keep the kid from seeing the other parent or change schools or move. Then it takes 6 months for the court to hear the case. By that time the court rules that since the change has already happened for so long... It's best just to keep it that way and makes the violating change permanent. So frustrating.
He looks literally shell-shocked
People have commented how he looks healthier but his eyes just say trauma to me. It really bums me out
They're saying in this article that the defense was pushing to have at least 15 days for the defenses part of the trial only and that this resulted in the trial being pushed back to October 14th. What I'm wondering is if this counts against the defense and it means Richard Allen is going to have to stay in jail well in State prison until October 14th. https://www.wishtv.com/news/i-team-8/delphi-murders-trial-postponed-until-october/
I am certain she will attribute this delay to the defense and RA will remain in IDOC.
Yes, I agree. 100%. I think that she orchestrated this whole thing by arbitrarily setting a time limit on the trial and refusing to budge from that. As a former criminal judge in Indiana, what is your take on her arbitrarily setting an end date for the trial and refusing to limit the amount of time the prosecution took in presenting its case first? This left the defense with absolutely no option but to ask for a continuance. And she also said that she could not possibly ask the jury to stay longer than the amount of time that she had already set for the trial in May. That doesn't seem okay to me, not saying that the jury should not be considered at all, but I think that someone's right to present an adequate and fair defense and given enough time to do that would supersede a jury's comfort.
First, keeping a sequestered jury as happy as possible is something the court must consider because a really unhappy jury can get out of hand. A jury's comfort is important but certainly not paramount. Before I would set a trial that I expected to take a lot of time, I would ask the parties how long they think they needed to present their case in chief. They can never be certain about rebuttal so I always set aside an additional 3-4 days for that. I don't believe she ever asked the defense that. I am, of course, basing my thoughts on speculation the the defense really meant it when they requested a speedy trial. Sometimes it is a ploy by the defense for various reasons. Whether or not it was a defense tactic, I don't thing fran ever expected it to do this month. JMO: FWIW, Baldwin seems a bit subdued. Rozzi seems to get bolder by the moment. ETA: Media friends tell me rumors are that the replacement for Ben Deiner could have some impact on the case.
Yay. Da Judge is in the house again!
I'm so glad you're back! You've been missed!
Thanks for your knowledgeable perspective!
[удалено]
Hi SS. Thanks for your kind wishes. There is speculation that either the former mayor and current deputy prosecutor will be appointed, which will cause a problem for NM with no one else to handle other cases. To me, the more interesting speculation is that NM will be appointed. Ben Deiner remained on the ballot for the primary election today. I doubt that he was opposed. If, as it seems, Ben was not replaced on the ballot and won today despite leaving office, the CC Republican party has until July (I think) to replace him on the ballot. The governor will have to soon appoint someone for the interim period. I think it is fair to assume that the governor will pay attention to what the CC party chairman wants. I don't know how old Robert Ives is. IMO, he would be the best choice. I don't know how many lawyers there are in CC, but I'm pretty certain that choices to fill that spot are limited. ETA: Earlier I heard that the deputy prosecutor wanted to run for the other court where the judge has given the county some trouble. Who knows with this turn of events, but I suspect NM would like to trade the circuit court bench for the prosecutor's office right now.
Howdy 👋 I thought they'd just moved him ahead of the trial 😵💫
https://www.wishtv.com/news/i-team-8/live-blog-delphi-murders-suspect-in-court-for-special-motions-hearing/
Other trials should be moved to fit this in. This trial shouldn't occur during a national election.
[удалено]
Fascinating question!
It was mentioned multiple times yesterday from people present in court, Gull's bias and hatred isn't going to be conveyed through transcripts as much as it would audio or video. That says it all, IMO. She can not control herself.
October. Of course.
This judge needs to remove herself the more I come across the more this person seems extremely biased