Requested formal Closing Statements are soon due, vote your opinion :
~ by FLDS TEXAS on June 11, 2009.
Posted in The Evidence Tags: San Angelo, Texas
Denied, Denied, Denied…..
cajIM said this on June 11, 2009 at 5:45 PM
GoldGoose spends 25,000 to tell the Judge the same thing, he aint got no evidence. So whats to hear? Him spend another 100 grand of Warrens money – money he needs for upcoming trials and tribulations?
Stamp said this on June 11, 2009 at 5:58 PM
Stamp, you mean “the faithful follower’s” money. NOT Warren’s money. Warren hasn’t had a paying job since his days as principal at Alta Academy, and that was 10 years ago.
NOPE it’s not Warren’s money, it’s the hard-working faithful’s money that is being spent on all of these attorneys.
Anonymous said this on June 11, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Yes I agree! And it makes you wonder why they keep giving him more!
Good tithings after bad. Warren is like a boat he is a hole that you pour money into.
Stamp said this on June 11, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Since Goldspot had NO evidence of conspiracy,,, Denied, Denied:)
deputydog1 said this on June 12, 2009 at 8:37 AM
Once the 3rd CoA ruled that the YFZ wasn’t a single household finding the evidence was lawfully obtained will be an uphill battle.
Alinusara10 said this on June 12, 2009 at 10:55 AM
3rd COA wasn’t fild on the fact whether it was single household alinusara.
It still doesn’t do away with the probable cause issue.
deputydog1 said this on June 12, 2009 at 12:06 PM
We will see. The evidence was gathered using the single household theory then once that was struck down they are trying to end around it stating that the evidence wasn’t found in your( the accused) specific household.
Alinusara10 said this on June 13, 2009 at 9:17 AM
alinusa your FLDS thinking isn’t going to work. That 3COA thing you made up isn’t working.
GrannyToad said this on June 13, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Look where “FLDS THINK” got Warren. And another dozen are following close behind.
Stamp said this on June 13, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Alinsura, CPS asked for specific age girls to be interviewed at that ranch… The problem was, they kept bringing children in but they were Much younger than the Girl they were looking for.
Im sure after so many,, CPS wised up and realized, there were many more children on that ranch, than they realized. Hence the house to house search.
deputydog1 said this on June 13, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Alinsura, CPS asked for specific age girls to be interviewed at that ranch…
Yes according to the warrant ages 10-17.
The problem was….
The problem was they was looking for a girl that didn’t exist. If due diligence was performed before they entered the ranch they would have known that.
Alinusara10 said this on June 13, 2009 at 10:27 AM
The problem was they were bringing in children 4yrs old to 10yrs old alinsura.. Lots of them.
deputydog1 said this on June 13, 2009 at 1:36 PM
There were 15 or 16 3 story buildings on that ranch, NOT one was numbered. The whole ranch was listed as ONE address.
deputydog1 said this on June 13, 2009 at 1:37 PM
The poll does not ask what SHOULD happen, but what you guess WILL happen.
Betty said this on June 15, 2009 at 8:22 AM
Poll is running after four days overwhelingly, with over 50 voters, at more than 80% respondents expressing that the search warrants are likely to be found as lawfully executed and therefore valid as evidence in the upcoming San Angelo Grand Jury indictments. Judge Walther’s formal ruling is still in the future and her ultimate ruling will be the deciding factor to this posed question. Fairly, one-sided result to date according to this poll survey.
cajIM said this on June 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM
So, do we find out today?
Betty said this on June 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM
Point of clarification on the poll – the first option indicates that a full hearing would be held if the motion is upheld, but the court already conducted the full hearing on the MTS. Procedurally it was a little confusing and it was ambiguous as to the exact point the proceeding moved from a preliminary hearing into a full blown Franks hearing – even the attornies were confused about that. But the Judge did say on the third day that they were into the full evidentiary hearing on the motion to suppress. That’s the end of it – if the motion us upheld, the evidence is excluded. I don’t believe there’s any way that can happen after Goldstein admitted they had know evidence LE had any knowledge the call was a hoax prior to execution of the warrants.
The State has submitted their proposed written findings of fact and conclusions of law – I don’t believe Goldstein has submitted his written arguments yet. He probably won’t until the Judge sounds the “Last Call” alarm. It has been a month now, and when Goldstein requested 30 days to submit his written argument the Judge indicated that was too long. On the other hand, judge also said she wasn’t giving him a deadline because she didn’t want him to feel so pressured that he ended up with another fake photo in his brief.
Anonymous said this on June 16, 2009 at 7:52 AM
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Blog at WordPress.com.