Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 47
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    271

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    Quote Quoting Mark47n
    View Post
    Whether or not the prosecutor felt they were going to prevail in a particular hearing doesn't mean they wouldn't attempt it. Defense attorneys do the same thing. The fact of the matter is that the prosecutor DID prevail. That the prosecutor wasn't confident that they would prevail is why they offered a deal. It's all moot now, anyway.

    Of course the DA wasn't going to call you to testify! DV victims are notoriously unreliable! Also, while the defendant has the right to confront their accuser, true, but that doesn't mean that the DA has to call the accuser. The defense certainly can themselves and your husband didn't assert that right). That your husbands attorney didn't assert that right is not the fault of the prosecution.

    If you are appealing the conviction you can only appeal the calls of the presiding judge and whether or not the procedure of the trial was correct. You cannot call witnesses or introduce new evidence. It's not a new trial.
    That is not true because the DA is using statements made at the heat of the moment as reliable?

    You can't have it both ways. Women will often exaggerate to the police at the scene to bury the spouse, later realizing the harm a little lie or inaccuracy causes.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    3,847

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    Quote Quoting Harold99
    View Post
    You can't have it both ways. Women will often exaggerate to the police at the scene to bury the spouse, later realizing the harm a little lie caused.
    Sig others will often also lie when court rolls around.

    If the OP's sig other lost the Sirois hearing that likely means that there was evidence that the defendant did something to get the OP to not testify.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    380

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    Quote Quoting flyingron
    View Post
    What TM was stating was that if the STATE (i.e., the prosecution) requests a jury, they can have it even if the defense doesn't. The US Constitution (and many of the states) guarantees the right of the defendant to a jury trial, but it is unspecified if the state has the same right. However, there are court cases (notably the Illinois Supreme Court People v. Scornavache) that do give such right to the state.
    I understand what he was saying, and I said in Ohio, if the DF wishes a jury trial he gets it. If the DF chooses a Bench trial and the state wishes a jury trial, the state has no say in it, the DF gets his bench trial, unless I am reading rule 23 incorrectly.

    http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Leg...lProcedure.pdf

    Quote Quoting lalafreed
    View Post
    Actually you seem to still not get it, or maybe you don't want to understand. But it is a huge deal, if the defense had won the Sirois hearing my husband would not be in prison right now. Literally. This was also the point in time that he was offered 6 months SHOCK, right before the hearing. Even the DA thought the defense was going to win the hearing.
    The DA was not going to call me to testify and did not. The main witness and in their eyes the "victim". A right the defendant has is to confront the victim under cross- examination. The Sirois hearing allowed for the DA to not call me as a witness, by being declaring legally unavailable by the Judge. And in our case allowing hearsay at trial.
    I quite understand what you are saying. All I said was, the phrase Legally unavilable, as a completed idea was not in the case cited.

    I said I understood the points Jack posted. I also read the case Ron posted, and I understand what was meant to be stated as a legal conclusion to the reader. I understand the point you are making about the hearing and your husband, I'm not disagreeing.

    But I'll drop it whether or not you think I am not getting it! I do wish the best for all concerned, I never meant my post to indicate otherwise.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    7

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    Quote Quoting RJR
    View Post
    I understand what he was saying, and I said in Ohio, if the DF wishes a jury trial he gets it. If the DF chooses a Bench trial and the state wishes a jury trial, the state has no say in it, the DF gets his bench trial, unless I am reading rule 23 incorrectly.

    http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Leg...lProcedure.pdf



    I quite understand what you are saying. All I said was, the phrase Legally unavilable, as a completed idea was not in the case cited.

    I said I understood the points Jack posted. I also read the case Ron posted, and I understand what was meant to be stated as a legal conclusion to the reader. I understand the point you are making about the hearing and your husband, I'm not disagreeing.

    But I'll drop it whether or not you think I am not getting it! I do wish the best for all concerned, I never meant my post to indicate otherwise.
    ok, Thank you. I appreciate your reply and that you do understand.

    Regardless of the original complaint, lies, exaggerated police statement or otherwise, the actual truth is I wasn't raped… but a man is still sitting in prison for raping me. It's disgusting and he doesn't belong there. That's what I need help with.

    It's obviously more complex and I'm not saying there was some grand conspiracy to create a crime out of thin air. What actually happened has more to do with covering up misconduct and pushing for whatever conviction they could get once they were aware that I recanted the majority of what was in the police statement.

    The police did absolutely no investigation into the original complaint and basically took a drunk and drugged woman's (my) word as gospel. Had they poked around even a little bit, they would have quickly and easily realized that the statement was largely untrue. Instead, it took me sobering up, getting back my copy of the statement (that was mysteriously missing even though it was supposedly left with me at the hospital), and then me doing the leg work for them; pointing out that their beliefs and theories were untrue and providing documentary proof. That's when the DA filed the Sirois application and ultimately got the judge to agree that my trial availability was legally compromised…” that I was legally unavailable” ( Even though I had recanted months before the issues raised in the Sirois hearing took place and before the grand jury which always made it confusing that he even got indicted). That decision also enable them to preclude evidence that I provided which irrefutably disproved much of the police statement. I should also point out that for much of my time at the hospital, I was in a blackout state and only remember bits and pieces.

    My husband's lawyer was obviously in over his head, but acted so confident and completely sure that a conviction was impossible, that we trusted him implicitly and followed some of his very bad and even damaging advice. To put this in perspective, he was indicted for first-degree kidnapping( an A-1 felony like murder) and a handful of rape and assault charges . He was facing over a hundred years to LIFE in prison, but they offered him shock( a New York State bootcamp style program for 6 months). The lawyer was so sure of everything, that he helped convince my husband to not take it. But more importantly, if the DA truly believed the indictment charges, why would they make such a low offer? I could understand offering 10 or 15 years if you think the case is weak or something but you don't offer 6 months to someone you believe belongs in prison for LIFE!

    This is very hard for me to talk about, but I've sat around waiting for a miracle for too long . We've been jerked around by lawyers refusing to give him his files and transcripts, the DA denying foil requests, the prison blocking our phone calls and mail privileges (I am allowed to visit him in person), and an assigned appeal lawyer who had zero interest in the case, didn't understand the charges, and wouldn't communicate with either of us about the case... even went so far as to say we couldn't see the brief until after it was filed.

    This was all too much for my husband to bare, especially given our experience with a trial lawyer who we blindly trusted. Now he's a pro se appellant with very limited access and resources. We just need whatever help we can get because it just seems like the system is letting us down.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    24,349

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    I'm going to ask you the same thing I asked of someone else on another board earlier today.

    Exactly what is it that you are asking a message board to provide you with?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    3,847

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    Is there some reason the defense didn't call you to testify?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,851

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    Quote Quoting RJR
    View Post
    I understand what he was saying, and I said in Ohio, if the DF wishes a jury trial he gets it. If the DF chooses a Bench trial and the state wishes a jury trial, the state has no say in it, the DF gets his bench trial, unless I am reading rule 23 incorrectly.

    http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Leg...lProcedure.pdf

    You are reading into the rule more than is there. The rule simply addresses when the defendant may waive his right to a jury trial. It does not on its face directly address whether the state has a right to a jury in a criminal case when the defendant has waived his right. Allowing a defendant to waive his right to a jury trial is not the same thing as saying the defendant has a right to a bench trial.

    That said, you happen to be correct that in Ohio the defendant has the right to a bench trial if he/she wants one. Some legislators in 2011 tried to change Ohio law to conform to the law in the federal system and the majority of states that effectively gives the prosecutor a right to a jury. In a legislative analysis provided to the legislature by the Ohio Judicial Conference (OJC), which speaks for the Court system, the OJC stated:

    House Bill 265 proposes to condition the defendant’s ability to waive a jury trial on the consent of the court and the prosecuting attorney. Twenty-nine states, the Federal criminal justice system, and Washington D.C. require the consent of the court and the prosecuting attorney in cases where a criminal defendant wishes to waive their right to trial by jury. This is a significant shift from the long standing policy in Ohio that the defendant alone has the right to demand a jury trial.

    If you read the analysis I linked, you will see that the OJC was very much against the idea of changing Ohio law to allow the state a right to a jury trial. But in the federal system and the majority of states, the prosecutor does have that right.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    47.606 N 122.332 W in body, still at 90 S in my mind.
    Posts
    1,584

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    This sounds like a real S*%T sandwich and I'm sorry to hear that you and your old man are being put through the wringer but there are some tough realities to face up to.

    It's unfortunate that your husband chose not to take the plea deal and only serve six months. Yes, he would've been convicted if he did but by not he chose to roll the dice and ended up convicted anyway. Alas, hindsight is always 20/20.

    Regarding your statement and retraction: you provided a statement while drunk and high, right? It's what you just said here and in the OP. You also state this:

    The police did absolutely no investigation into the original complaint and basically took a drunk and drugged woman's (my) word as gospel. Had they poked around even a little bit, they would have quickly and easily realized that the statement was largely untrue. Instead, it took me sobering up, getting back my copy of the statement (that was mysteriously missing even though it was supposedly left with me at the hospital), and then me doing the leg work for them; pointing out that their beliefs and theories were untrue and providing documentary proof. That's when the DA filed the Sirois application and ultimately got the judge to agree that my trial availability was legally compromised…” that I was legally unavailable” ( Even though I had recanted months before the issues raised in the Sirois hearing took place and before the grand jury which always made it confusing that he even got indicted). That decision also enable them to preclude evidence that I provided which irrefutably disproved much of the police statement. I should also point out that for much of my time at the hospital, I was in a blackout state and only remember bits and pieces.
    The bolded portion indicates to me that your memory of events are so compromised that you cannot possibly know what happened. This could've been used to compromise your statement by the defense attorney. Was your statement questioned by the defense attorney? Your medical records from the event could've also been used to indicate your level of impairment which could've raised questions about your statement.

    There must have been more to this than just your statement. A statement that is questionable at best (I assume it was mentioned during the trial that you were blasted out of your mind when you delivered the statement, right?) just doesn't seem like enough. The list of crimes that you rattle off certainly screams that there was more than just a statement. There was clearly enough to convince 12 jurors to unanimously convict your husband of at least one serious felony.

    Appeals, again, are not about the evidence in the trial, they are about the conduct and proceedings of the trial and, possibly your representation. It is not a means of retrying the case by introducing new evidence or In an appeal your husband will have to deliver a clear and concise legal argument explaining how the TRIAL was improperly conducted or some other reason that would overturn his conviction. There is a reason that people hire attorney's for this task. Your husband will have to make the aforementioned arguments as well as be able to counter the arguments of other professional attorney's arguing.

    I'm not saying that you should give up. I'm saying that what's already an uphill battle is made more difficult by choosing to go pro se and that by doing so he may cost himself a successful appeal. Given that the success rate for criminal appeals is about 4% I'd say that you want to do everything you can to squeeze all you can from that already meager margin.
    "Where do those stairs go?"
    "They go up!"

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    271

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    Quote Quoting cbg
    View Post

    Exactly what is it that you are asking a message board to provide you with?
    Probably what anyone else comes here for, information and insight into a legal issue.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,851

    Default Re: Wrongful Conviction- and I'm the "Victim"

    Quote Quoting Harold99
    View Post
    Probably what anyone else comes here for, information and insight into a legal issue.
    While likely true, I think that narrowing exactly what the OP would like addressed would be helpful in focusing the discussion to help her get what she's looking for.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Criminal Records: Recording "No Conviction" Although Found "Guilty"
    By johnk1 in forum Criminal Records
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-06-2013, 02:06 PM
  2. Sex Offenses: Defending a Sexual Assault Charge by Claiming the Victim is a "Woman Scorned"
    By michiganguy in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-05-2012, 05:09 PM
  3. Victims Rights: "Victim" Dropping No Contact Order
    By gosling in forum Criminal Procedure
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-01-2012, 12:33 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-18-2009, 01:40 PM
  5. Lawyer Said "Dismissed", Court Cost Receipt Says "DUI 1st Conviction"
    By teddro in forum Drunk and Impaired Driving Charges
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-21-2008, 03:02 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources