Elsewhere at Moultrie
While most of the DC media is feeding on the Levy trial, we hunt for whatever little scraps we can find.
For the last week or so, we’ve been expecting the plaintiff’s response to the October 4 Defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss Counts One, Three and Four, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment as to Counts One, Three and Four of Plaintiff’s Complaint.
It’s been delayed but word just came down from the clerk’s office to expect it early next week.
A consent motion was entered yesterday to allow Team Wone a two-day extention to file:
10/20/2010 Plaintiff’s Consent Motion for Two-Day Extension of Time to Respond to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Counts One, Three and Four, or in the Alternative, Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Filed.
We’ll post the response as soon as it’s filed. Also expected in the next week or two is the plaintiff’s response to the defense’s gag order motion.
I am on pins and needles!! I am taking a big deep breath just in case the defendants’ motion to dismiss is approved (God help us!), but at the same time I am praying for the truth to come from these proceedings. We all need the truth, don’t we?
Hi Rebecca:
As you know, I have posted that I am uneasy about that motion to dismiss as well. But, we do have to wait for the plaintiff’s response and the eventual ruling.
The only up-side to the motion being granted (but with so many drastic downsides!), is that it may moot the defendants’ 5th Amendment reliances, and we may get some needed truth.
In other words, if the complaint is limited to Count II, which only deals with post-murder negligent activities, the defendants may have to answer questions at deps and at trial, because there may be no further possible criminal matters with which they can be charged regarding post-murder activities (i.e., double jeapardy). Any DC attorneys have thoughts on this? Of course, they could still rely on the 5th Amendment as to any questions relating directly to the murder itself.
Today is 10/22, and the plaintiff’s response to defendants’ motion to dismiss based on the Statute of Limitations is due to be filed before the close of business today. Here’s hoping you can get a copy today, Craig; I can’t even think of waiting till Monday. This is extremely important. It’s doubtful that proceeding on Count II alone would produce the answers Ms. Wone sorely needs, not to mention the damages.
Even Andy Warhol could not have imagined the monster that Culuket may be: these endless delays, nuances, and absurdities look like they are “straight” out of the Factory. BTW, a little bird told me that Moe, the female drummer from the Velvet Underground, is now a tea partier. If that unexpected apotheosis does not say “just no to drugs,” then only the events of August 2, 2006 may surpass it.
Clio: Moe had a long career working for Wal-Mart too, I’d heard.
And we’re back to the more monochromatic masthead. To every thing there is a season…
Editors, this is a very minor observation, but have you changed the aesthetics of the masthead once again? The Rorshach test model has apparently been replaced by the stenciling-on-a-bathroom-stall approach: is there more there there?