AmericanCitizen

Commiskey, IN

#1 Jun 15, 2012
If the States scenario doesn't fit and the jury voted to acquit....

Indiana has the most explicit self-defense law in the country...bar none, yet it has no significance if a court simply refuses to acknowledge it's existence, which is exactly what has happen in Jennings County, IN in the most egregious manner.

After SEVEN (7) years a second trial is to commence on Monday the 18th in the most asinine and unjust criminal trial in history and this is only possible due a lack of any oversight on our courts and court-appointed defense attorney's who blatantly work for the prosecution and NOT the defendant. You be the judge.
----------
From August 2005 trial

Trial transcript / Preliminary Instructions

Pg 9.)“…you are to apply the law as you actually find it and you are not to disregard it for any reason.”

Indiana State Law IC 35-41-3-2

"No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary."

Pg 11.)“The State must prove each element of the crime by evidence that firmly convinces each of you and leaves no reasonable doubt.”
----------
The States case is that he was maybe possibly 10-14 feet away and running without stopping at the window.

This is documented in the court records

Pg 28 Trial Transcript / States’ Opening Statement

“…we’re probably going to estimate probably 10 to 14 feet away from the door, I believe, is where ..."

Pg 870 State’s Closing Argument:

“Billy didn’t stop to look at the window....because he is running away
----------
States Forensic Expert (Pathologist / Dr. Barbara Weakly-Jones)
Pg 401

Q.) Looking at whatever in a window, but you could get that angle like that, isn’t that true?

A.) Yeah, mm-mm, pretty close

Q.) Well, I mean for instance his feet. He could have been originally facing and then bent over looking in the window. That could create the proper angle.

A.) It's possible, yes.

If the State must prove each element of their case with evidence, how do they explain how their own forensic expert disproves the most important part of their case, the trajectory of the wound while confirming the Defendants account?

So can any one explain what is their case and why won't my own attorney meet with me to explain what it is?

When I read IC 35-41-3-2;

"No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary."

I read it to mean that before a D.A. files murder charges against someone who was being attacked at his own address (by a person they were all quite aware of/ lifetime restraining order but still had a conceal carry permit) he better have some pretty damn convincing tangible, physical evidence to disprove self-defense.

The standard for probable cause increasing greatly...not eliminated

Their scenario does NOT create the "proper angle" as proven by their own EXPERT...if their scenario does NOT create the "proper angle"...what is their case that nullifies IC 35-41-3-2
AmericanCitizen

Commiskey, IN

#2 Jun 15, 2012
If the judge declared;

pg 929 transcript / Final Instructions from judge Webster

"There has been evidence introduced in this case that the accused was exercising his right of self-defense."

Their scenario does NOT create the "proper angle"

"evidence introduced in this case that the accused was exercising his right of self-defense."...what is their case

“While the jury was considering Gilmore's fate, all of its members agreed that the defendant was not guilty of murder, according to the jury foreman, Robert Kennedy”

“We (the jury) were unanimous on not guilty of murder” Kennedy said.

“We based all our feelings not on the court room procedures but the interviews in the jail house.”

The jury found the entire trial unworthy of ANY consideration...what is their case

Their scenario does NOT create the "proper angle"

What am I not understanding...seriously anyone...what is their case

If their scenario doesn't fit and jury voted to acquit....

I realize, instead of asking ...what is their case, it should say...they have no case, which everyone with half a brain realizes, however, that isn't stopping them from going to trial no matter how clear and explicit IC 35-41-3-2 is...

so since their scenario doesn't fit and the jury voted to acquit why is there a trial commencing on Monday and ...what is their case

and in all seriousness and honesty, what sort of defense counsel does nothing to address this and instead aides and abets it...

what sort of defense counsel helps to eliminate the States forensic expert who confirms the defendants account and blows the States case out the door

is it not evident that court-appointed defense counsel is working for the prosecution and has been appointed solely to protect the judge and prosecutor when he argues this

"11. The defendant from his filings believes the angle of a bullet and testimony from Dr. Weakly-Jones is central to his defense. He has cited this in numerous filings with the court. Counsel disagrees with this theory. Any such testimony from Dr. Weakly-Jones would have called for speculation as to the location of the defendant and alleged victim. Such speculative questions would not be permitted under the rules of evidence if objected to by the State. The State would have objected to such questions and therefore were not asked in the deposition."

"The defendant from his filings believes the angle of a bullet and testimony from Dr. Weakly-Jones is central to his defense."

"Counsel disagrees with this theory."

"Any such testimony from Dr. Weakly-Jones would have called for speculation as to the location of the defendant and alleged victim."
----------

Any such testimony from the Dr. was presented and is ON RECORD in the first trial, is court-appinted defense counsel that stupid or considers everyone else to be so...the "rules of evidence" would not allow it...good gosh just how stupid or corrupt must defense counsel be to make such an asinine statement when he's referring to testimony that has ALREADY been presented and ON RECORD

WHY is defense counsel eliminating the States forensic expert testimony that confirms the Defendants account and debunks the States scenario...if he's not working for the prosecutor

If their scenario doesn't fit and the jury voted to acquit...just doesn't matter in Jennings County

Indiana State Law IC 35-41-3-2 is more explicit then any law in the country and forbids any legal jeopardy of any kind “whatsoever” for protecting yourself.

Judges instructions; “There has been evidence introduced in this case that the accused was exercising his right of self-defense."

“While the jury was considering Gilmore's fate, all of its members agreed that the defendant was not guilty…”

Why and HOW is there a second trial commencing on Monday the 18th when IC 35-41-3-2 explicitly forbids it and their scenario doesn't fit and the jury voted to acquit....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Indiana University Bloomington Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Most gay and bisexual men in the United States ... Aug '14 Latter Day Taints 19
Verbatim: Feinstein named founding dean of IU's... (Dec '13) Dec '13 The Iron Dicktator 3
Henry County family preparing for child number 15 (Jul '13) Sep '13 Family Christian ... 2
New Tattoo Artist in town (Jul '13) Jul '13 Donna 1
Chinese Researcher Using Natural for Stem Cell ... (Feb '13) Feb '13 Ronald Weiss 1
Ball State budget cut millions by state (Jan '13) Jan '13 standards 1
Erika Smith: For Indianapolis, engaging the com... (Mar '12) Mar '12 The Ulitmate Kaptoz 3
•••

Indiana University Bloomington People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••