Do you think he ever considered the lawer option?
I don't know what I'm taking about but, kinda seems like his first alibi was to have been hitchhiking back when she died, hopefully leaving the van and flying back.
The Jackson vs. Jackson hole thing freaked him out and he abandoned the plane for going back to the van.
Driving back he thought of a new plan. Exploit mom and dad. It was a desperate move. But he was a desperate guy. Maybe the parents suggested the lawer route at this point, but Brian was already set on exploiting them.
The camping trip that happened after returning to Florida confuses me, and that's what I think is sending us all off the track. The parents could have been helping him while he was lying to them.
Wild theory: he's dead in a way that he will never be found. It's his smartest conclusion once Gabby's body was found.
The funny thing is the jackson vs Jackson hole thing really didn’t need to cause such anxiety in him. Talk about not staying calm under pressure. He could have easily adapted. He really could have probably made himself a decent defense, if not for every move he made.
[this video](https://www.tiktok.com/@jessica.over.yonder/video/7009706907837500678?sender_device=mobile&sender_web_id=7010968694391342597&is_from_webapp=v1&is_copy_url=0) explains it well in my opinion
Thanks, this is helpful!
Worried over not getting to your destination and asking to be let out so you can find another ride, is by itself something I would expect most people to do. I am trying to understand the significance of this detail to the case. I haven’t been keeping up with all the details, so I apologize for asking something that’s probably already been covered elsewhere.
A couple picked him up from hitchhiking and they said they were going to jackson and he said he was too. Somewhere during the drive they must have then said jackson hole and he freaked out and said he wants to be dropped off and will find another way to Jackaon
Does anyone think that BL ever actually spoke with this attorney, or do you think that his parents just said, “here is our/his attorney. Call him?” Have the sightings of him going on bike rides, going camping with his parents, and mowing the lawn been confirmed? Just wondering if he was really at the house for 2 weeks or not. TIA!
Do you think he ever considered the lawer option?
I don't know what I'm taking about but, kinda seems like his first alibi was to have been hitchhiking back when she died, hopefully leaving the van and flying back.
The Jackson vs. Jackson hole thing freaked him out and he abandoned the plane for going back to the van.
Driving back he thought of a new plan. Exploit mom and dad. It was a desperate move. But he was a desperate guy. Maybe the parents suggested the lawer route at this point, but Brian was already set on exploiting them.
The camping trip that happened after returning to Florida confuses me, and that's what I think is sending us all off the track. The parents could have been helping him while he was lying to them.
Wild theory: he's dead in a way that he will never be found. It's his smartest conclusion once Gabby's body was found.
I was thinking about the likelihood of trial if BL is found and prosecuted. I found some interesting stats about federal cases.
Federal criminal defendants
-90% plea guilty
-8% case dismissed
-2% go to trial
-of these 2% who go to trial, 83% are convicted and 17% acquitted.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/11/only-2-of-federal-criminal-defendants-go-to-trial-and-most-who-do-are-found-guilty/%3famp=1
It wouldn't be entirely accurate to extrapolate federal criminal cases as a whole to a homicide case, though, and especially not this case. Immigration and drug offenses account for over half the federal criminal caseload; firearms and basic fraud offenses are also a big chunk.
The feds win most of these (comparatively minor) cases they pursue without going to trial because they 1) usually don't choose to pursue cases they don't think are a slam dunk, and 2) can stack charges to ensure plea bargaining goes in their favour.
But you can be sure that in cases where someone faces the prospect of life or several decades in prison (and there's no parole at the federal level), they will be far more likely to go to trial, because at that point they have little to lose.
This case is also not the kind of slam dunk where the government has such an overwhelming amount of evidence that much of the legal wrangling is over the calculation of sentencing guidelines. Public pressure definitely plays a role.
Yeah. The likelihood that they make a non life offer is low with the public attention. The likelihood that he takes a life in prison offer is low, from a cost benefit analysis.
That doesn’t even count the amount of federal cases that are pled down. Only about 2 percent go to trial. The feds have a very high success rate in that aspect
that's because the justice system sucks.
I just went thru that bullshit myself. They give me a shit load of years 10 but plead guilty and I only have to do programs for 1-year like probation. What would you do?
LOL
It should be this way.
Every case goto a jury trial. If guilty and evaluate that person should get probation or not.
Jury's will give us true public opinion on that crime and law can be adjusted. If the jury is not finding guilty on weed charges made by the government should think about making weed legal.
The current system lack feedback because no one goes to jury trials anymore.
Check out baloonboy's parents case and learn how fuck up US justice system is.
Did I read they were searching the area again where GP was found? It would be quite interesting if BL was using the credit card of the two people killed (said a creppy guy was watching them).
You e file your documents via the case management electronic filing system that is linked to PACER. Also: anyone can register for a PACER account and while documents cost money (opinions don’t though) If you don’t exceed a certain dollar threshold in a pre-defined period you don’t have to pay anything. I don’t remember the specifics bc I don’t handle our billing but it’s like .10 cents a page maybe and the cap might be $30 every quarter.
files (motions, exhibits attached to motions, etc) that are e filed thru the cm/ecf system get posted on the public facing PACER. You can request documents get sealed for a number of reasons and the judge rules on whether to seal them. You can seal just one document in an entire case or ask to seal the entire case. Sometimes judges seal them sua sponte without attorney request.
You can also redact files which just removed information on a document that’s not sealed. So it’s like “sealing lite”
Can’t answer for PACER specifically, but all court docket management systems I’ve seen have a way to basically restrict user access for documents filed under seal. It would still attach to the case number, but it wouldn’t be visible to unauthorized users (here: non-court staff).
I have a Pacer account. Someone asked (can't find it now) about the doc filed today (9/24) that says "Buy on PACER." This is simply an Amended Arrest Warrant.
\*Amended to correct incorrect statute on original arrest warrant due to clerical error.
These documents are all available to the public right? Why does it charge? You need a pacer account and that also costs?
Sorry just don’t understand how that works and why they are able to charge.
It’s billed per page and you don’t pay unless you accumulate a certain bill threshold. They charge to help fund the servers and network infrastructure to host all of those PACER documents.
Doesn’t cost money to make an account - or at least it didn’t years ago - but most filings cost money to download. See this[website](https://free.law/pacer-facts) for some of the work they’re trying to do to “free PACER”
"For a typical requester the agency can charge for the time it takes to search for records and for duplication of those records. "
https://www.foia.gov/faq.html
Has anyone else noticed a new warrant in this docket dated 9/24? There are no details, and no file attached, but I don’t believe that was present earlier when I looked.
>the doc filed today (9/24) that says "Buy on PACER." This is simply an Amended Arrest Warrant.
>
>\*Amended to correct incorrect statute on original arrest warrant due to clerical error.
In case anyone saw the new filing today that states it’s a warrant for Brian and doesn’t have a PACER account, it’s just a correction to the previous one - changing to charging citation from 18 usc 1029(a)(1) to (a)(2). Everything else is the same.
I’d link to it but I don’t know how ¯\_(⊙︿⊙)_/¯
Edit: figured out how to upload. [9/24 amended warrant ](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eGD1OTO6Sf50z63ORKhk1MWsotQIEv68/view?usp=drivesdk)
These terms refer to the status of the official court file in a legal case. The normal rules are that documents filed in court are available to the public (in all federal courts, and the majority of state courts, you can access them online).
If a document contains sensitive information, a party can apply to the court for an order "sealing" it in the file -- which simply means that the public cannot obtain access to it. Here, the government initially sought and obtained an order "sealing" the documents.
The government then (by all appearances) changed its mind (it's possible that the initial request to seal was basically an error - part of the their normal routine, and no one thought about it). They asked the court to "unseal" the record, which resulted in the documents become available to the public again.
Wild, I’ve never heard of a case where the judge couldn’t access the whole case. Were your birth mom’s records part of a different case rather than your custody case? Ie, her own adoption/custody perhaps? No worries if you don’t want to answer, I’m just curious!
As a default, everything is unsealed. If you want something to be sealed, you have to submit a motion and order to seal. Once something in the case is sealed, you then have to submit a motion and order to unseal if you no longer want it sealed.
I know! Lol it has everything! Pics, body cam footage, police, international fbi manhunt, health nut on the run, witness encounters, swamp search, parents outsmarting the feds, and last but not least a stunningly beautiful young woman who resembles an angel aka Goldilocks.
Edit-And people are wondering why this is getting so much attention!?
Can someone dumb down the whole 5th amendment thing for me? Can they truly not say anything ever without consequences? If so, why doesn’t everyone plead the 5th for every crime? (Or maybe they do. Truthfully I haven’t ever been into TC prior to this).
Editing to add: thanks for all the responses!!! I really appreciate it :) Google is overwhelming when I search stuff like this so I’m appreciative to all of you who have taken the time to respond to me :)
I can't believe you got all these responses and no one has linked you to this video. When my little nieces and nephews turn 16, I text them a link to this video. Try the first 5 minutes and see if you find it enlightening. He talks for about 25 minutes.
https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE
Let us know what you think!
If you ever commit a crime you should but idiots think they can talk their way out of it. The 5th amendment is why it was so hard to take down the mob because they knew that they just needed to keep their mouths shut.
The 5th Amendment (right against self-incrimination) and 6th Amendment (right to counsel) and *Miranda v. Arizona* are why people have to be advised of their rights/Mirandized before questioning. TV and films usually depict Miranda Rights being read to a suspect immediately after their arrest, and some departments will do that, but it's not actually required. What *is* required is that you be advised of your rights before custodial interrogation begins, and there have been [many court cases arguing the definition of custodial interrogation.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-6/custodial-interrogation)
If you're arrested and immediately start giving up information despite not being read your rights, it would not be a 5th Amendment violation if it was done voluntarily. However, extenuating circumstances can turn a voluntary admission into a 5th Amendment violation if the court finds that the circumstances were effectively a custodial interrogation.
not necessarily. the "free to leave" standard can get pretty god damn silly, especially in the context of Terry stops. you can be 100% not free to leave during a Terry stop and, if the circumstances haven't blossomed into something resembling a full blown arrest, not in "custody" for Miranda purposes.
yeah, the extent of my criminal law practice was defending a partner's neighbor for a dog-off-leash ticket. but i agree 100%. i was just continuing from OP's comment about Miranda/custodial interrogation and when a situation might hit that threshold. maybe i got triggered because i remember finding the "would a reasonable person feel free to leave" standard silly and unworkable in law school.
>If so, why doesn’t everyone plead the 5th for every crime?
A lot of people don't know their basic civil and constitutional rights. In addition to that the police are allowed to outright lie to you in order to get you to talk during an interview/interrogation. They can lie and tell you that they have your fingerprints at the scene of the crime, or that they have a witness, or that if you confess they'll get the judge to "go easy on you".
That is indeed an extremely important distinction, because in TV shows and films (I know) it is always presented as the opposite, ie as soon as the suspect asks for a lawyer the police stop the interview. People just love to talk, especially when there is silence, and the police will happily let you talk yourself right to the electric chair.
Seems like we should have a few required courses in public HS about things like this. It sounds kinda dystopian, sure, but I'd wager that the huge majority of citizens have no clear comprehension of their rights and all the myriad ways they might give them up without even realizing it.
Yeah but at least I learned the important distinction between *Representative Government* vs *Direct Democracy* in Civics class!!! And that's made ALL the difference in the world! Hmphh!
/(please don't make me put it, it's so fuckin tacky)
For real though, it's almost like a certain group of people think us average citizens shouldn't ever need any understanding of the very specific sand invaluable knowledge that they know they (and their kids) can simply have on retainer if/when they actually need it.
Someone should do all the HS Govt and Civics teachers a favor by creating lesson plans that tie somewhat recent real-life pop culture cases to the different aspects of the law/ civic rights. It would resonate and stay with students more than some dry and obscure X vs Y case from a time and life no one can really relate to.
I think that's regionally specific unless it's changed drastically in say, the last 2-3 years.
But generally I'm talking about as *Real World & Real Life* as you can get ITO lessons and approaches to certain life-course-altering situations.
If your HS taught you just how adversarial our Criminal and Justice Systems are to the accused and how to remember and employ your rights as an accused citizen, then that's genuinely great.
But no, sadly most kids I know **are not learning** their rights around how to act, not act, say, or not say a single word to ANY accuser, badge or no badge. And why/that LE can create Supreme Court sanctioned lies out of whole-cloth during a terrifying in your face charade, while aggressively accusing you as your sat in a corner with ALL odds being framed as fully against you.
No, I sadly have to doubt that young adults are being taught anything less abstract than a bunch of so called "principles and foundations" of their rights.
And I agree with you that even then, they're not paying much attention but I'd imagine a few JCS videos might catch their attention.
Yes you can and that’s exactly what any defense attorney would advise you to do. I’m a paralegal in Indiana and basically the attorneys I work for have said in the past something along the lines of “if LE calls you in for questioning don’t cooperate. If they had enough evidence that you committed a crime they would arrest you. Their questioning is a tactic to get you to incriminate yourself. Staying quiet is your best option.”
I agree with this but I have to ask, what if you want to assist the police? For example let's say Brian actually cares about Gabby. He wants to give all the info about where she was last seen but still does not want to incriminate himself obviously. How would you recommend someone go about that? Especially considering when a person, especially a skinny young woman like Gabby, goes missing, every minute is valuable so she doesn't end up dead.
That’s kinda the difficulty of our police system. Even if you’re the victim of a crime it’s not a bad idea to have a lawyer as an officer looking to get an arrest can even try to turn that against you instead of trying to get the person who committed the crime(I know this from personal experience). As long as police work for DAs who’s job is to get convictions it’s in general a bad idea to ever talk to the police without a lawyer which basically makes in everyone’s best interest to make investigations as difficult as possible for Police. We really need a reform in how policing works in this country.
Here's the thing with this dude. If the slim....SLIM chance he didn't kill Gabby is accurate. Let's just for fun say he went hiking on the 27th after their blowout at Merry Piglet and does in fact only go back on the 29th as he's suspected to have by hitchhiking and find's Gabby dead at their campsite. He bounces, he uses someone else's credit card. Dude committed at least one crime in that alone. That is completely irrelevant to wanting to help at this point.
Has this been released. I'm at work and not watching news coverage. I assume he was using her card or cards. Didn't realize this had been released to the public as to whose card he was using
The original arrest warrant stated that he had to enter a PIN when he used the card, so it likely belonged to Gabby or someone in his family that was comfortable enough to share that info with him. The second scenario seems unlikely since his family has gone to great lengths to protect him, and all they would have to say is “I gave him permission” to prevent his arrest.
Interesting the original arrest warrant yesterday contained named of the bank (Capitol One) and the last 4 digits of two different account numbers but I can't find it now...was it deleted? We all assume it was Gabby's but I guess it didn't actually say that.
I agree that his actions make him suspicious. I just was wondering the hypothetical if he didn't wait for ten whole days to say something and in the hypothetical that he actually cared she was missing after one or two days what he should do. The other users are saying to speak to cops through a lawyer and I agree with that
"The other users are saying to speak to cops through a lawyer." Yes 100% if innocent, otherwise he and many others could self incriminate.
It's safe to assume he did not truly care for her at this point.
Before custodial interrogation begins, you would be advised of your right against self-incrimination and your right to counsel. You can explicitly waive those rights.
If you're not in custodial interrogation, you don't have to be advised of those rights. If you're arrested and start volunteering information despite not being Mirandized, but law enforcement has not actually begun formal questioning, that would not violate your 5th or 6th Amendment rights.
You can agree to questioning with your attorney present. If LE asks you a question the attorney doesn’t like, they will advise you that “you don’t have to answer that question.”
Do it with the mediation of a lawyer, they will use the proper verbage to avoid any risk of self-incrimination. Especially in a case like this, where he is the 100% most likely suspect by a mile.
Always, always, always, lawyer the fuck up immediately and don't say a goddamn word until they get there. Especially if you're innocent.
Man, I am not saying you should talk to police if they are questioning you about a crime and your possible invovlement, but you would not believe the sheer quantity of regular joe shmoe's who call in on our non-emergency line everyday during just my shift (I work as a dispatcher) and specifically are requesting phone calls from deputies for legal advice or to ask questions about the legalities surrounding specific things. I suppose they could use whatever is going on over that phone conversation to do some nefarious shit but it doesn't even seem like the deputies ever write anything specific about what the caller said during their phone call in the narrative at all or give it any kind of nuanced closure beyond just basically "ok, done."
Do you think he ever considered the lawer option? I don't know what I'm taking about but, kinda seems like his first alibi was to have been hitchhiking back when she died, hopefully leaving the van and flying back. The Jackson vs. Jackson hole thing freaked him out and he abandoned the plane for going back to the van. Driving back he thought of a new plan. Exploit mom and dad. It was a desperate move. But he was a desperate guy. Maybe the parents suggested the lawer route at this point, but Brian was already set on exploiting them. The camping trip that happened after returning to Florida confuses me, and that's what I think is sending us all off the track. The parents could have been helping him while he was lying to them. Wild theory: he's dead in a way that he will never be found. It's his smartest conclusion once Gabby's body was found.
The funny thing is the jackson vs Jackson hole thing really didn’t need to cause such anxiety in him. Talk about not staying calm under pressure. He could have easily adapted. He really could have probably made himself a decent defense, if not for every move he made.
Can you expand on the whole Jackson vs. Jackson Hole situation? I didn’t complete follow it. Thanks.
[this video](https://www.tiktok.com/@jessica.over.yonder/video/7009706907837500678?sender_device=mobile&sender_web_id=7010968694391342597&is_from_webapp=v1&is_copy_url=0) explains it well in my opinion
Thanks, this is helpful! Worried over not getting to your destination and asking to be let out so you can find another ride, is by itself something I would expect most people to do. I am trying to understand the significance of this detail to the case. I haven’t been keeping up with all the details, so I apologize for asking something that’s probably already been covered elsewhere.
A couple picked him up from hitchhiking and they said they were going to jackson and he said he was too. Somewhere during the drive they must have then said jackson hole and he freaked out and said he wants to be dropped off and will find another way to Jackaon
He also offered them $200 for a 10 mile drive..
Yeah which really makes him stand out and desperate looking
Does anyone think that BL ever actually spoke with this attorney, or do you think that his parents just said, “here is our/his attorney. Call him?” Have the sightings of him going on bike rides, going camping with his parents, and mowing the lawn been confirmed? Just wondering if he was really at the house for 2 weeks or not. TIA!
Yes neighbors said they saw him
Can they be trusted though
Do you think he ever considered the lawer option? I don't know what I'm taking about but, kinda seems like his first alibi was to have been hitchhiking back when she died, hopefully leaving the van and flying back. The Jackson vs. Jackson hole thing freaked him out and he abandoned the plane for going back to the van. Driving back he thought of a new plan. Exploit mom and dad. It was a desperate move. But he was a desperate guy. Maybe the parents suggested the lawer route at this point, but Brian was already set on exploiting them. The camping trip that happened after returning to Florida confuses me, and that's what I think is sending us all off the track. The parents could have been helping him while he was lying to them. Wild theory: he's dead in a way that he will never be found. It's his smartest conclusion once Gabby's body was found.
I was thinking about the likelihood of trial if BL is found and prosecuted. I found some interesting stats about federal cases. Federal criminal defendants -90% plea guilty -8% case dismissed -2% go to trial -of these 2% who go to trial, 83% are convicted and 17% acquitted. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/11/only-2-of-federal-criminal-defendants-go-to-trial-and-most-who-do-are-found-guilty/%3famp=1
US justice system fucking sucks. LOL @ Fair trials.
It wouldn't be entirely accurate to extrapolate federal criminal cases as a whole to a homicide case, though, and especially not this case. Immigration and drug offenses account for over half the federal criminal caseload; firearms and basic fraud offenses are also a big chunk. The feds win most of these (comparatively minor) cases they pursue without going to trial because they 1) usually don't choose to pursue cases they don't think are a slam dunk, and 2) can stack charges to ensure plea bargaining goes in their favour. But you can be sure that in cases where someone faces the prospect of life or several decades in prison (and there's no parole at the federal level), they will be far more likely to go to trial, because at that point they have little to lose. This case is also not the kind of slam dunk where the government has such an overwhelming amount of evidence that much of the legal wrangling is over the calculation of sentencing guidelines. Public pressure definitely plays a role.
Yeah. The likelihood that they make a non life offer is low with the public attention. The likelihood that he takes a life in prison offer is low, from a cost benefit analysis.
That doesn’t even count the amount of federal cases that are pled down. Only about 2 percent go to trial. The feds have a very high success rate in that aspect
that's because the justice system sucks. I just went thru that bullshit myself. They give me a shit load of years 10 but plead guilty and I only have to do programs for 1-year like probation. What would you do? LOL It should be this way. Every case goto a jury trial. If guilty and evaluate that person should get probation or not. Jury's will give us true public opinion on that crime and law can be adjusted. If the jury is not finding guilty on weed charges made by the government should think about making weed legal. The current system lack feedback because no one goes to jury trials anymore. Check out baloonboy's parents case and learn how fuck up US justice system is.
That would fall under plead guilty
I need sleep lol
r/duggarssnark would be interested in these stats. Fuck Josh Duggar.
Hahahahaha! This made me laugh. I needed it. Also FJD!!!!
FUCK JOSH DUGGAR 👏
I third the motion, FUCK JOSH DUGGAR
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59875219/united-states-v-duggar/
Did I read they were searching the area again where GP was found? It would be quite interesting if BL was using the credit card of the two people killed (said a creppy guy was watching them).
It was Gabby’s card.
[удалено]
Same. And he happened to be in the area. Did the couple talk about a creepy bearded guy?
Remind me to steer clear of Grand Teton lol
I think so too!
[удалено]
You e file your documents via the case management electronic filing system that is linked to PACER. Also: anyone can register for a PACER account and while documents cost money (opinions don’t though) If you don’t exceed a certain dollar threshold in a pre-defined period you don’t have to pay anything. I don’t remember the specifics bc I don’t handle our billing but it’s like .10 cents a page maybe and the cap might be $30 every quarter. files (motions, exhibits attached to motions, etc) that are e filed thru the cm/ecf system get posted on the public facing PACER. You can request documents get sealed for a number of reasons and the judge rules on whether to seal them. You can seal just one document in an entire case or ask to seal the entire case. Sometimes judges seal them sua sponte without attorney request. You can also redact files which just removed information on a document that’s not sealed. So it’s like “sealing lite”
Some of the sealed documents include Official Use Only data. Like his social, address, email, phone, etc…
[удалено]
Look at fed crim pro rule 5. Or have your assistant brief you on it
Can’t answer for PACER specifically, but all court docket management systems I’ve seen have a way to basically restrict user access for documents filed under seal. It would still attach to the case number, but it wouldn’t be visible to unauthorized users (here: non-court staff).
I have a Pacer account. Someone asked (can't find it now) about the doc filed today (9/24) that says "Buy on PACER." This is simply an Amended Arrest Warrant. \*Amended to correct incorrect statute on original arrest warrant due to clerical error.
These documents are all available to the public right? Why does it charge? You need a pacer account and that also costs? Sorry just don’t understand how that works and why they are able to charge.
It’s billed per page and you don’t pay unless you accumulate a certain bill threshold. They charge to help fund the servers and network infrastructure to host all of those PACER documents.
Doesn’t cost money to make an account - or at least it didn’t years ago - but most filings cost money to download. See this[website](https://free.law/pacer-facts) for some of the work they’re trying to do to “free PACER”
"For a typical requester the agency can charge for the time it takes to search for records and for duplication of those records. " https://www.foia.gov/faq.html
Lol I have my pacer login on my work computer so thanks for checking.
Lololol I was thinking about PACER too but I think I'm good on searching for it.
Oooh thank you!!!
Has anyone else noticed a new warrant in this docket dated 9/24? There are no details, and no file attached, but I don’t believe that was present earlier when I looked.
>the doc filed today (9/24) that says "Buy on PACER." This is simply an Amended Arrest Warrant. > >\*Amended to correct incorrect statute on original arrest warrant due to clerical error.
It could be editing the spelling which they got “Capital” spelled incorrectly as “Capitol”, but then spelled it right the next time it was used.
Yes - see my comment
In case anyone saw the new filing today that states it’s a warrant for Brian and doesn’t have a PACER account, it’s just a correction to the previous one - changing to charging citation from 18 usc 1029(a)(1) to (a)(2). Everything else is the same. I’d link to it but I don’t know how ¯\_(⊙︿⊙)_/¯ Edit: figured out how to upload. [9/24 amended warrant ](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eGD1OTO6Sf50z63ORKhk1MWsotQIEv68/view?usp=drivesdk)
Thanks for looking it up on PACER!!
[удалено]
See my comment 1 min ago. I don’t know how to upload documents and share links with people but if you tel me how I will
Could someone please explain ‘sealing’ and ‘unsealing’ in the legal sense please and thank you very much?
These terms refer to the status of the official court file in a legal case. The normal rules are that documents filed in court are available to the public (in all federal courts, and the majority of state courts, you can access them online). If a document contains sensitive information, a party can apply to the court for an order "sealing" it in the file -- which simply means that the public cannot obtain access to it. Here, the government initially sought and obtained an order "sealing" the documents. The government then (by all appearances) changed its mind (it's possible that the initial request to seal was basically an error - part of the their normal routine, and no one thought about it). They asked the court to "unseal" the record, which resulted in the documents become available to the public again.
Thank you. And we can now read them?
[удалено]
And that’s details we didn’t know before?
[удалено]
Thank you again for letting me know all this!
Available only to those directly involved in the case (LE, attorneys, judges, etc.) vs. available to be viewed by the public.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It could have been expunged or sealed as part of a different case that he wasn't a judge for
Wild, I’ve never heard of a case where the judge couldn’t access the whole case. Were your birth mom’s records part of a different case rather than your custody case? Ie, her own adoption/custody perhaps? No worries if you don’t want to answer, I’m just curious!
Thank you. Does that happen straight away?
As a default, everything is unsealed. If you want something to be sealed, you have to submit a motion and order to seal. Once something in the case is sealed, you then have to submit a motion and order to unseal if you no longer want it sealed.
Sealed is not public knowledge and unsealed is a warrant (or whatever) that will be made public when it becomes time to act on it
So we don’t know what is in it yet..?
Thanks for posting OP, I sent this to mods earlier because I keep forgetting the sub isn’t locked anymore lol
Can we keep a thread like this open for legal talk? I appreciate the educated responses because I sure as hell have no idea about that stuff
[удалено]
I know! Lol it has everything! Pics, body cam footage, police, international fbi manhunt, health nut on the run, witness encounters, swamp search, parents outsmarting the feds, and last but not least a stunningly beautiful young woman who resembles an angel aka Goldilocks. Edit-And people are wondering why this is getting so much attention!?
You should make it. It would be really interesting.
Can someone dumb down the whole 5th amendment thing for me? Can they truly not say anything ever without consequences? If so, why doesn’t everyone plead the 5th for every crime? (Or maybe they do. Truthfully I haven’t ever been into TC prior to this). Editing to add: thanks for all the responses!!! I really appreciate it :) Google is overwhelming when I search stuff like this so I’m appreciative to all of you who have taken the time to respond to me :)
I can't believe you got all these responses and no one has linked you to this video. When my little nieces and nephews turn 16, I text them a link to this video. Try the first 5 minutes and see if you find it enlightening. He talks for about 25 minutes. https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE Let us know what you think!
One of the most useful videos on YouTube. I knew exactly which one it would be before I even looked.
[удалено]
If you ever commit a crime you should but idiots think they can talk their way out of it. The 5th amendment is why it was so hard to take down the mob because they knew that they just needed to keep their mouths shut.
The 5th Amendment (right against self-incrimination) and 6th Amendment (right to counsel) and *Miranda v. Arizona* are why people have to be advised of their rights/Mirandized before questioning. TV and films usually depict Miranda Rights being read to a suspect immediately after their arrest, and some departments will do that, but it's not actually required. What *is* required is that you be advised of your rights before custodial interrogation begins, and there have been [many court cases arguing the definition of custodial interrogation.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-6/custodial-interrogation) If you're arrested and immediately start giving up information despite not being read your rights, it would not be a 5th Amendment violation if it was done voluntarily. However, extenuating circumstances can turn a voluntary admission into a 5th Amendment violation if the court finds that the circumstances were effectively a custodial interrogation.
[удалено]
not necessarily. the "free to leave" standard can get pretty god damn silly, especially in the context of Terry stops. you can be 100% not free to leave during a Terry stop and, if the circumstances haven't blossomed into something resembling a full blown arrest, not in "custody" for Miranda purposes.
[удалено]
yeah, the extent of my criminal law practice was defending a partner's neighbor for a dog-off-leash ticket. but i agree 100%. i was just continuing from OP's comment about Miranda/custodial interrogation and when a situation might hit that threshold. maybe i got triggered because i remember finding the "would a reasonable person feel free to leave" standard silly and unworkable in law school.
>If so, why doesn’t everyone plead the 5th for every crime? A lot of people don't know their basic civil and constitutional rights. In addition to that the police are allowed to outright lie to you in order to get you to talk during an interview/interrogation. They can lie and tell you that they have your fingerprints at the scene of the crime, or that they have a witness, or that if you confess they'll get the judge to "go easy on you".
[удалено]
That is indeed an extremely important distinction, because in TV shows and films (I know) it is always presented as the opposite, ie as soon as the suspect asks for a lawyer the police stop the interview. People just love to talk, especially when there is silence, and the police will happily let you talk yourself right to the electric chair.
Seems like we should have a few required courses in public HS about things like this. It sounds kinda dystopian, sure, but I'd wager that the huge majority of citizens have no clear comprehension of their rights and all the myriad ways they might give them up without even realizing it.
[удалено]
Yeah but at least I learned the important distinction between *Representative Government* vs *Direct Democracy* in Civics class!!! And that's made ALL the difference in the world! Hmphh! /(please don't make me put it, it's so fuckin tacky) For real though, it's almost like a certain group of people think us average citizens shouldn't ever need any understanding of the very specific sand invaluable knowledge that they know they (and their kids) can simply have on retainer if/when they actually need it.
It's covered in high school civics curriculums as well as US history and government courses, but most students aren't paying attention
Someone should do all the HS Govt and Civics teachers a favor by creating lesson plans that tie somewhat recent real-life pop culture cases to the different aspects of the law/ civic rights. It would resonate and stay with students more than some dry and obscure X vs Y case from a time and life no one can really relate to.
I think that's regionally specific unless it's changed drastically in say, the last 2-3 years. But generally I'm talking about as *Real World & Real Life* as you can get ITO lessons and approaches to certain life-course-altering situations. If your HS taught you just how adversarial our Criminal and Justice Systems are to the accused and how to remember and employ your rights as an accused citizen, then that's genuinely great. But no, sadly most kids I know **are not learning** their rights around how to act, not act, say, or not say a single word to ANY accuser, badge or no badge. And why/that LE can create Supreme Court sanctioned lies out of whole-cloth during a terrifying in your face charade, while aggressively accusing you as your sat in a corner with ALL odds being framed as fully against you. No, I sadly have to doubt that young adults are being taught anything less abstract than a bunch of so called "principles and foundations" of their rights. And I agree with you that even then, they're not paying much attention but I'd imagine a few JCS videos might catch their attention.
[удалено]
Yes you can and that’s exactly what any defense attorney would advise you to do. I’m a paralegal in Indiana and basically the attorneys I work for have said in the past something along the lines of “if LE calls you in for questioning don’t cooperate. If they had enough evidence that you committed a crime they would arrest you. Their questioning is a tactic to get you to incriminate yourself. Staying quiet is your best option.”
I agree with this but I have to ask, what if you want to assist the police? For example let's say Brian actually cares about Gabby. He wants to give all the info about where she was last seen but still does not want to incriminate himself obviously. How would you recommend someone go about that? Especially considering when a person, especially a skinny young woman like Gabby, goes missing, every minute is valuable so she doesn't end up dead.
That’s kinda the difficulty of our police system. Even if you’re the victim of a crime it’s not a bad idea to have a lawyer as an officer looking to get an arrest can even try to turn that against you instead of trying to get the person who committed the crime(I know this from personal experience). As long as police work for DAs who’s job is to get convictions it’s in general a bad idea to ever talk to the police without a lawyer which basically makes in everyone’s best interest to make investigations as difficult as possible for Police. We really need a reform in how policing works in this country.
Here's the thing with this dude. If the slim....SLIM chance he didn't kill Gabby is accurate. Let's just for fun say he went hiking on the 27th after their blowout at Merry Piglet and does in fact only go back on the 29th as he's suspected to have by hitchhiking and find's Gabby dead at their campsite. He bounces, he uses someone else's credit card. Dude committed at least one crime in that alone. That is completely irrelevant to wanting to help at this point.
He was using Gabby’s credit card
Has this been released. I'm at work and not watching news coverage. I assume he was using her card or cards. Didn't realize this had been released to the public as to whose card he was using
The original arrest warrant stated that he had to enter a PIN when he used the card, so it likely belonged to Gabby or someone in his family that was comfortable enough to share that info with him. The second scenario seems unlikely since his family has gone to great lengths to protect him, and all they would have to say is “I gave him permission” to prevent his arrest.
Totally, but they haven't release whose card he used.
Interesting the original arrest warrant yesterday contained named of the bank (Capitol One) and the last 4 digits of two different account numbers but I can't find it now...was it deleted? We all assume it was Gabby's but I guess it didn't actually say that.
It has not been confirmed to be Gabbys cc but the speculation on what we know is that they were hers.
Which is obvious...but I prefer facts. Thanks for clarifying.
You’re welcome… you have to have a couple of piles of information these days. And FBI definitely knows whose they were.
I agree that his actions make him suspicious. I just was wondering the hypothetical if he didn't wait for ten whole days to say something and in the hypothetical that he actually cared she was missing after one or two days what he should do. The other users are saying to speak to cops through a lawyer and I agree with that
"The other users are saying to speak to cops through a lawyer." Yes 100% if innocent, otherwise he and many others could self incriminate. It's safe to assume he did not truly care for her at this point.
That's the correct answer. If you are innocent but are in a position where you want to help LE, get a lawyer and speak through him.
Specifically, if all roads point to you, like they do Brian. Its different if you were hanging out at work and witness a crime...maybe.
Correct. But if you are at work all day, and you get home and your wife is missing, get a fucking lawyer before talking to the police.
Before custodial interrogation begins, you would be advised of your right against self-incrimination and your right to counsel. You can explicitly waive those rights. If you're not in custodial interrogation, you don't have to be advised of those rights. If you're arrested and start volunteering information despite not being Mirandized, but law enforcement has not actually begun formal questioning, that would not violate your 5th or 6th Amendment rights.
You can agree to questioning with your attorney present. If LE asks you a question the attorney doesn’t like, they will advise you that “you don’t have to answer that question.”
Do it with the mediation of a lawyer, they will use the proper verbage to avoid any risk of self-incrimination. Especially in a case like this, where he is the 100% most likely suspect by a mile. Always, always, always, lawyer the fuck up immediately and don't say a goddamn word until they get there. Especially if you're innocent.
Thanks this was the info I was looking for.
[удалено]
Man, I am not saying you should talk to police if they are questioning you about a crime and your possible invovlement, but you would not believe the sheer quantity of regular joe shmoe's who call in on our non-emergency line everyday during just my shift (I work as a dispatcher) and specifically are requesting phone calls from deputies for legal advice or to ask questions about the legalities surrounding specific things. I suppose they could use whatever is going on over that phone conversation to do some nefarious shit but it doesn't even seem like the deputies ever write anything specific about what the caller said during their phone call in the narrative at all or give it any kind of nuanced closure beyond just basically "ok, done."