Comments on: Runaway Train

By: Clio

Clio — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:43:42 +0000

Bernie is a bit shady, but he’s not that desperate for love. Spag could attract much better looking meat than our Three, and the others are not even looking. So, other than Dyl spotting one of the younger associates at the Crew Club “working out,” there can be no discounts for indiscretions here!

By: Bea

Bea — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 05:53:29 +0000

As in one of the defense attorneys representing a defendant for free because the boys are blackmailing them because the attorney had been a trick? I think it’s too far-fetched. Or maybe I’m missing your point.

By: Carolina Morro

Carolina Morro — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 05:40:06 +0000

Maybe one of the defense attorneys also played with Joe and Dyl? Might make for a bargan– their silence for representation.

By: former crackho

former crackho — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:50:25 +0000

Maybe they could come up with a crazy explanation as to why they found the need to tamper with the murder scene even though an intruder actually killed him? Lesser of the evils? But I agree, it doesn’t make sense.

By: Friend of Rob

Friend of Rob — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 14:47:23 +0000

I meant $300-$500k per defendant.

By: Bea

Bea — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:47:25 +0000

Agree, David, about the charges. I appreciate your description of Connolly’s face – I wonder, too, if there wasn’t a sinking feeling that she’d NOT be quite as cordial/accomodating to the defense as Weisburg, and their shining moment had passed.

By: David

David — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:06:51 +0000

Bea,

As a legal strategy, I found it odd myself. One would think that an innocent defendant(s) would motion to have all counts dismissed. Saying that one count could stand in an odd way admits quite candidly, “Ok we agree the evidence is there for probable cause.” That is an amazing admission on behalf of the defendants.

But even more its the tampering charge, which is a symptom-of-the-problem charge, not the problem. This could not have happen without the conspiracy or obstruction. Both are the roots that bloomed into the tampering charge.

When Connolly said, “this was a bad day for the defense”, he is speaking about this motion, and how Joe’s legal analysis was eviscerated by Judge Leibowitz. You could see it on Connolly’s face. He looked like a steamed Maine lobster at a 4th of july cookout.

David

By: CDinDC

CDinDC — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:23:48 +0000

He’ll need one of those wide “touring” seats.

By: Bea

Bea — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 23:20:15 +0000

Interesting side note, and not directly related to this post, but why did the Motion to Dismiss not seek dismissal of the third charge of “evidence tampering”? Is this a test balloon to see if the prosecution would be willing for them to plead to “evidence tampering” in exchange for dropping other charges? (I hope to doG that the prosecution does NOT, nor do I think they will).

But it does seem strange in a shotgun, kitchen sink kind of motion that one wouldn’t try to kick out evidence tampering as well. Perhaps it’s dead to nuts that they’re guilty of that and didn’t want the prosecution to make public all the evidence it has as to such charges.

Just sayin’.

By: Bea

Bea — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:30:17 +0000

I still want to see big Joe on a bicycle doing a paper route around McLean.