Friday, December 16, 2005
The trial's over and I can talk about it to my heart's content. That probably won't be too much, though, because I have a busy day and weekend coming up. Tonight is the office party, then I work lunches both Sat and Sun, and sometime in there Ryan and I have to get our tree. Although we got our shopping done way ahead of time, we've been slacking on the tree and have just realized that Christmas is coming up way faster than we'd thought.
On the subject of the trial. . .
The defendant was charged with First Degree Contempt- being in contempt of a court order of protection (aka restraining order) against the mother of his son. They have had quite a history, including him serving three months for threatening her with a knife, so she had the restraining order put against him and the only contact he is allowed with the son is one hour a month supervised by an employee of social services. The mother got an unlisted number and only gave it to a few people, warning them not to give it out, especially to the defendant.
So, Mr. Defendant was over visiting his daughter from another mother (who has since remarried another man with a nearly identical redneck moustache), and when the daughter's mother and stepfather left to go shopping, the girl (age 9) decided she wanted to call her half brother (age 8, under the order of protection). Presumably he put her up to it and wanted to talk to the son himself, but we can't prove that much. Anyway, at the residence they were at there was no long distance service, so the defendant used a calling card to call his son's (and baby momma #1's) house. How he got the number we don't know, but that was a big strike against him. He initiated contact by dialing for the little girl, but she was the one on the line at first.
The boy's mother picked up and recognized the girl, but said the girl was acting unusual- normally they chit-chat about school and such, but the girl was very to-the-point and insisted on talking to her half brother. The mother said it would be okay if she talked to her mom first, but the girl said her mom wasn't home. After a bit the girl hung up. The mom was concerned about the girl being left home alone, so she called back and the girl answered, again wanting to talk to her half brother. When the mom said she needed to talk to the adult in the house, the girl hung up again. The mom called back, but no one answered the phone.
In the fourth call, the girl (with the defendant dialing) called the mom back. When she again asked to speak to the adult in the house, something happened. What happened was the main point of the trial. The victim (mother) claimed that the defendant got on the phone and yelled, "You can't keep me away from my son, I'll kill you first!", then continued yelling but the woman hung up. The defendant claimed that yes, he dialed the phone, but that the girl was the only one who spoke. Ten minutes passed, then the woman called the cops, and when they showed up she was crying and shaking.
There were more little details and later conversations that we as a jury felt supported the victim's story, so we found him guilty. It's a felony, so he'll get at least a year in jail. We were putting on our coats in the jury room afterwards, when the judge came in and told us we'd have to stay inside for a few minutes because the little girl had been left after giving her testimony with only the defendant to watch her! Since he was getting put away, she was alone! I think the laywer ended up taking her back to her mother's, but really, how come all the morons have to procreate at such a high rate?
On the subject of the trial. . .
The defendant was charged with First Degree Contempt- being in contempt of a court order of protection (aka restraining order) against the mother of his son. They have had quite a history, including him serving three months for threatening her with a knife, so she had the restraining order put against him and the only contact he is allowed with the son is one hour a month supervised by an employee of social services. The mother got an unlisted number and only gave it to a few people, warning them not to give it out, especially to the defendant.
So, Mr. Defendant was over visiting his daughter from another mother (who has since remarried another man with a nearly identical redneck moustache), and when the daughter's mother and stepfather left to go shopping, the girl (age 9) decided she wanted to call her half brother (age 8, under the order of protection). Presumably he put her up to it and wanted to talk to the son himself, but we can't prove that much. Anyway, at the residence they were at there was no long distance service, so the defendant used a calling card to call his son's (and baby momma #1's) house. How he got the number we don't know, but that was a big strike against him. He initiated contact by dialing for the little girl, but she was the one on the line at first.
The boy's mother picked up and recognized the girl, but said the girl was acting unusual- normally they chit-chat about school and such, but the girl was very to-the-point and insisted on talking to her half brother. The mother said it would be okay if she talked to her mom first, but the girl said her mom wasn't home. After a bit the girl hung up. The mom was concerned about the girl being left home alone, so she called back and the girl answered, again wanting to talk to her half brother. When the mom said she needed to talk to the adult in the house, the girl hung up again. The mom called back, but no one answered the phone.
In the fourth call, the girl (with the defendant dialing) called the mom back. When she again asked to speak to the adult in the house, something happened. What happened was the main point of the trial. The victim (mother) claimed that the defendant got on the phone and yelled, "You can't keep me away from my son, I'll kill you first!", then continued yelling but the woman hung up. The defendant claimed that yes, he dialed the phone, but that the girl was the only one who spoke. Ten minutes passed, then the woman called the cops, and when they showed up she was crying and shaking.
There were more little details and later conversations that we as a jury felt supported the victim's story, so we found him guilty. It's a felony, so he'll get at least a year in jail. We were putting on our coats in the jury room afterwards, when the judge came in and told us we'd have to stay inside for a few minutes because the little girl had been left after giving her testimony with only the defendant to watch her! Since he was getting put away, she was alone! I think the laywer ended up taking her back to her mother's, but really, how come all the morons have to procreate at such a high rate?
