Monday, June 30, 2014

 
HOW JURY MISCONDUCT IN FORD CASE COULD GET VILLALOBOS A NEW TRIAL

You can see the Ford opinion here  If what the opinion says is accurate the DOJ or Saenz should be able to seek the indictment of the plaintiff's lawyer and juror with no problem, unless limitations has run.

In the Villalobos trial Judge Hanen originally held closed hearings with the jury foreman over jury misconduct.  The jury foreman made clear to Judge Hanen, even after the closed hearings that Judge Hanen's orders meant nothing to him and immediately went back to his job at the city and told anyone who would listen everything which was discussed at the closed hearing.

Judge Hanen eventually ordered the transcript of the two closed hearings released to Villalobos' appellate attorney for use in his appeal.

Jury misconduct related to internet issues has result is a number of reversals.  In this case what is really interesting is, the juror not only was reading Emma Perez-Trevino's FB page, but also posted comments to her reporting.  Emma being Emma trashed Villalobos attorneys on her FB page during the trial.  Any normal newspaper would have pulled her from the trial and fired her - but not the Herald because this is the Herald and now AIM which owns the Herald - ethics has no place in journalism.

The record will show that the jury was leaning towards a mistrial.  The court was informed that two jurors said they would never change their position.  We do not know who those two jurors are.  We also do not know how the jury foreman's conduct may have impacted those jurors' decision to change their mind.  It may take a habeas corpus to get to the evidence.  Inasmuch as I have not seen the testimony of the closed hearings, I do not know if the other jurors were interviewed.  If they were never called in by defense counsel then we have even a bigger problem.  It is possible defense counsel made the request and Judge Hanen refused their request to interview under oath the other jurors.

If the Ford opinion is accurate, Jim Solis spoke with a juror during the deliberations.  If you remember Jim Solis is serving time for his part in the Limas corruption trial. 

Once a juror is compromised no verdict can be considered trustworthy.  The reasoning in the Ford case could actually help Villalobos.

Jury misconduct along with Emma trashing Villalobos attorneys on her FB page while covering the trial forms the best chance of Villalobos getting a new trial.

There were problems in his  case.  One, Oscar de la Fuente's testimony was clearly scripted and not credible.  In my opinion the deal he had with the DOJ was to protect DOJ lawyers and had nothing to do with testifying against Villalobos.  If his testimony was as credible as the DOJ claims to believe they could have proven most of it without Oscar testifying.

Second the money payment evidence was very weak.  In my view the DOJ had very weak circumstantial evidence to prove any money was paid to Villalobos. 

Do not get me wrong, I think is was as guilty as sin and should have gotten 20 years.  But there is a difference between what I believe and the admissible evidence at trial.

BY THE WAY - REMEMBER SAENZ SAID HE WAS GETTING THE OSCAR DE LA FUENTE TRIAL TRANSCRIPT IN ORDER TO PROSECUTE HIM

Yea, we all knew it was for show only - Saenz will never prosecute Oscar de la Fuente even with his sworn to confession.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Stop giving the Villalobos family false hope. They know your game...giving them hope in order for them to trust you so they can release the FBI interviews you want so much. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN DUDE.

BobbyWC said...

I personally believe the FBI is already interviewing how they got out and how they are being used. I'm not sure I even want access to them anymore. My primary point was to push for a criminal investigation on the extortion issue and since that appears to be happening, I no longer need them.

Jury misconduct related the internet is a hot issue. The ABA wants the story, but Villalobos has made clear he will not cooperate. He fears something because an ABA story could guarantee he release.

That is the story I am after - what is it that Villalobos fears? The answer is not in the FBI interviews.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

But you already printed and have in your possession the interview given to you by the Dolores Zarate camp. So you have had them in your possession.

BobbyWC said...

yes and I published it as part of the election - here is currently no use for any more in terms of the election. The only issue is, did the person Villalobos give them to use them for extortion purposes when Villalobos intended them to be disseminated before the election.

I do not need them for that investigation to proceed. The feds already know what happened and who was involved

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

yes and I published it as part of the election - here is currently no use for any more in terms of the election. The only issue is, did the person Villalobos give them to use them for extortion purposes when Villalobos intended them to be disseminated before the election.

I do not need them for that investigation to proceed. The feds already know what happened and who was involved

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

yes and I published it as part of the election - here is currently no use for any more in terms of the election. The only issue is, did the person Villalobos give them to use them for extortion purposes when Villalobos intended them to be disseminated before the election.

I do not need them for that investigation to proceed. The feds already know what happened and who was involved

Bobby WC