Skip to comments.
Elizabeth Smart thread, September 5, 2002-?
Posted on 09/04/2002 8:39:12 PM PDT by IamHD
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 761-780, 781-800, 801-820 ... 1,081-1,100 next last
To: Utah Girl
Thanks. Guess we'll just have to keep our eyes and ears open.
To: Utah Girl
Shouldn't be too hard for anyone in SLC to find out. His address is known.
To: sandude
Definitely, else he wouldn't be doing his job.
To: varina davis
On the other hand, it might not get to court -- if charges are dropped or something like that.
To: sandude
About Angela in the grand jury:
No lawyers allowed in the grand jury, Sandude, except prosecutors. She could periodically go outside to consult with her lawyer, though.
To: Utah Girl
Thanks anyway.
Looking at Richard Dean Miller's Official State of Utah Sex Offender Registry, this guy must have a good income.
White - Ford Pick-Up Truck 2002
Red - Subaru Impreza, 1998
Gold - Mazda 626, 1998
White - Ford Pick-Up Truck 1991
786
posted on
09/08/2002 10:02:25 PM PDT
by
lakey
To: varina davis
Wasn't there an article in the last day or two that the burglary charges have been dropped?
787
posted on
09/08/2002 10:04:12 PM PDT
by
lakey
To: Sherlock
What happened to your blue van theory?
788
posted on
09/08/2002 10:05:10 PM PDT
by
lakey
To: Devil_Anse
If the GJ wants to talk to Angela again, like you, I'll figure it's because she can no longer claim the marital privilege.
To: lakey
Yes, there was. It's posted on the new suspect thread.
To: Devil_Anse
Re Uniform Rules of Evidence -- they only apply to those states which have adopted them, and they are subject to tinkering by a state's legislature (statutory law) and judiciary (case or common law).
If you are further interested in Utah law, you may find something at www.findlaw.com. I went there once to find out what Utah's murder and kidnapping statutes were -- in terms of what the elements of the crimes were.
I am too busy to do that right now -- have to take care of (you came close to guessing it right!) my higher-order multiples plus singleton children!
To: cookiedough
I'll figure it's because she can no longer claim the marital privilege. Here's another legal question. Suppose Angela was an active member of the conspiracy. In her original testimony she would have used her spousal right when asked questions about Richard. Now answering those very same questions could be incriminating to herself. Would she still be able to claim the 5th? Is it possible that she may have waived her right to claim the 5th in future testimony by claiming the spousal privilege on the first go around? Weird question I know but I'm just curious.
792
posted on
09/08/2002 10:16:21 PM PDT
by
sandude
To: sandude
Sandude, it seems high likely that Angela would have been advised that she has now lost her immunity if that is so. And if it is so, it's highly UNLIKELY she would have appeared on larry king after her husband's death, still proclaiming his innocence, etc., if she thoughth she might yet face a grand jury.
To: varina davis
Where is West Valley City?
NETH'S AUTO REPAIR, 4301 WEST 3500 SO. WEST VALLEY CTY 84120
To: sandude
No, it's a good question.
I can't see how she waived her Fifth Amendment rights by asserting the marital privilege.
I have a close friend who is a criminal trial lawyer, and when he gets back into town tomorrow or Tuesday, I'll ask him for a definitive answer. He's got vast experience with grand juries, criminal conspiracies, and the like.
One thing I do know is that the defendants my friend has represented have wives or girlfriends who knew what was going on in the defendant's criminal life. What always surprises me is that the wives/mothers of their children don't seem to care -- they heartily want their men to stay out of prison (unless the wife or children are the victims of the crime in question).
The one exception was a case which involved the mafia and the DEA double-teaming the defendant -- and the defendant acted to protect his family from the mafia's death threats against them.
I doubt very much that the mafia is involved in this case, and if Ricci was, then I think there is at least an even chance Angela knew about it.
To: sandude
"Is it possible [Angela] may have waived her right to claim the 5th in future testimony by claiming the spousal privilege on the first go around?"
I know your post wasn't to me, but what an excellent question!
IMO, the short answer would be no, that she hadn't waived her right to take the Fifth.
For example, a person who is in custody and whom police are questioning may start out by answering a few of their questions, but then may clam up and refuse to answer. The person has the right to do this. The police can't say, hey, you started telling us, now you have to finish what you were saying. Since the privilege against self-incrimination originates in the Constitution, it's going to be bigger than any desire the police may have to have questions answered.
Supposing that Angela herself had committed crimes in relation to the Smart case, and supposing that Richard had also done so, seems to me that while Richard was alive, she could declare to the grand jury that "I claim the marital privilege on behalf of my husband's confidential statements to me, and I claim my privilege against self-incrimination as to the rest of what you're asking me." (Maybe not phrased like that, but that's the gist.)
You raise the possibility of a waiver, and she could waive the Fifth and/or the marital privilege, but I just can't believe that her attorney would have allowed her to waive her Fifth Amendment privilege without getting something in return (such as immunity, at least partial.)
The stuff she'd have claimed marital privilege on would have been stuff that would implicate Rick, while the stuff she'd have taken the Fifth on would have been things that would implicate her. Since all the info would stay right in her little head, no one would be able to separate it out into those two categories--except maybe her lawyer who no doubt sat down with her to discuss it b/f and during grand jury. If something implicated them both, I'm sure the lawyer would have told her to take the Fifth on that, or claim both privileges.
To: varina davis
NETH'S AUTO REPAIR, 4301 WEST 3500 SO. WEST VALLEY CTY Near Kearns where the theme park is.
797
posted on
09/08/2002 10:46:46 PM PDT
by
sandude
To: sandude
Refresh my memory...the theme park, Kearns, is that where - I want to say Stillman - wrong, but the man who beat the Hansen girl lived?
798
posted on
09/08/2002 10:51:48 PM PDT
by
lakey
To: sandude
Thanks. I found it. Magna is closer to Federal Heights.
To: lakey
Lakey, no Javier Sickler was from Magna.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 761-780, 781-800, 801-820 ... 1,081-1,100 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson