Bump because tomorrow court date.
Bump because tomorrow court date.
Go be a court reporter Druff!Quote:
Originally Posted by dmndkutr
Any updates?
Updates since January 17:
01/17/2020 9:00 AM
- MOTION TO DISMISS COUNSEL Mr. Mueller (Raymond Davis' attorney) submitted on the briefs. Defendant made a statement regarding dismissing his case pursuant to double jeopardy. Court advised the Defendant that today s hearing was about his Pro Per Motion to Dismiss Counsel. Defendant argued that Mr. Mueller had only been in contact with him one time for twenty minutes and it was to hire a private investigator. Furthermore, he did not request Mr. Mueller to file a motion to recuse the Judge or for bail. Colloquy between the Court and the Defendant about his behavior during the last trial and use of profanity. Colloquy between the Court and Defendant about the Defendant s competency and why there was a mistrial. Colloquy between the Court regarding the Defendant s bail and the Defendant indicating that he did not have a problem with his bail. Court advised the Defendant that Mr. Mueller was deemed appropriate to file the necessary motions on his behalf. Court finds that the Defendant has displayed a failure to behave or follow procedures and the Court has an obligation to control it s proceedings. COURT ORDERED, Defendant s Pro Per Motion to Dismiss Counsel, DENIED. Trial date STANDS.
01/23/2020
- This matter came on the Court's calendar on January 17, 2020 after Defendant filed two Motions to Dismiss Counsel on December 26, 2019 and January 16, 2020 respectively. The January 16, 2020 motion sought to dismiss counsel as well as the case as a whole. As Defendant is represented by counsel, the Court heard the motions only in regards to whether or not counsel should be dismissed or remain on the case. The other substantive issues were not argued due to this being a fugitive document as to those points. Should counsel deem it appropriate to file any motions having to do with arguments Defendant brought up in the fugitive portion of the motion, counsel is free to do so. After hearing argument in regards to the performance of counsel, the Court ordered the December 26, 2019 Motion to Dismiss Counsel denied. As such, the Court also orders the January 16, 2020 Motion to Dismiss Counsel denied and the proceedings regarding the motion scheduled for February 10, 2010 are hereby vacated. If either party believes there are outstanding matters that this Court has not addressed please contact chambers and the matter will be placed on calendar. CLERK'S NOTE: The above minute order has been distributed to: Chief Deputy D.A. Stacey L. Kollins and Attorney Craig A. Mueller (Mueller & Associates)
02/03/2020 9:30 AM
- Upon the inquiry of the Court, Defendant stated no new Motion To Dismiss Counsel has been filed. Mr. Mueller stated he's prepared to proceed with the Motion To Dismiss. Court noted the matter is not on calendar. Upon the inquiry of the Court, Ms. Kollins stated the Defendant's motion was filed 5 PM Friday; they called about 3:30 PM to ask if it'd been received. Court stated the motion can be addressed orally. Colloquy regarding scheduling of Defendant's Motion To Dismiss, Inzunza case and trial readiness. Mr. Mueller stated he can be ready for trial next week if the Defendant's motion is not granted. Ms. Kollins stated the State will be ready and noted the defense filed a witness notice at 5 PM with no phone numbers and requested the contact information. Mr. Mueller stated all he has will be given to the State. COURT ORDERED, case to trial February 10, 2020 at 1:00 PM; proceedings SET for Defendant's Motion To Dismiss. Mr. Mueller requested the transcripts from the Evidentiary Hearing and for the Court to order the Clerk to provide a copy of JAV's. Court stated the transcript is in Odyssey. CUSTODY 2-5-20 9:30 AM Defendant's Motion To Dismiss 2-10-20 1:00 PM Jury Trial
There also seems to be an attempt to get someone named Kendall Finley from out of state to testify as a witness (not sure for which side).
Not sure what happened on Monday at the trial.
Nothing happened. More delaying bullshit and insanity from Ray. My guess is he now knows his ass is fried and he’s trying his damndest to avoid a trial hoping he’ll get some sweetheart deal from the DA. Well it doesn’t seem likely to be coming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
02/10/2020 CANCELED Jury Trial - FIRM (1:00 PM) (Judicial Officer Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Vacated
02/10/2020 Reset by Court to 02/10/2020
02/10/2020 CANCELED Motion to Dismiss (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Vacated - per Judge
Motion to Dismiss Counsel
02/12/2020 Recorders Transcript of Hearing
Recorders Transcript of Hearing Re: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 02/05/2020
02/13/2020 Motion for Own Recognizance Release/Setting Reasonable Bail
Motion and Notice of Motion for Reinstatement of Own Recognizance
02/14/2020 Clerk's Notice of Hearing
Notice of Hearing
02/19/2020 CANCELED Motion to Dismiss (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Vacated - Previously Decided
Motion to Dismiss Counsel
02/19/2020 Motion (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Defendant's Motion and Notice of Motion for Reinstatement of Own Recognizance Release
RIP pedo nig.
Updates:
02/05/2020 9:30 AM
- Argument in support of Defendant's Motion To Dismiss by Mr. Mueller and Defendant, and in opposition by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, motion DENIED. Motion To Dismiss Counsel FILED IN OPEN COURT. Defendant moved to dismiss counsel and presented argument in support thereof. COURT ORDERED, Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Counsel DENIED; case to trial February 10, 2020 at 1 PM. Defendant stated he has a couple of other motions to file. Court informed the Defendant he cannot file motions as he does not represent himself. Mr. Mueller stated he will be filing a Widdis Motion. Ms. Kollins advised she's waiting on the phone numbers of the witnesses and that she gave counsel a new return from Facebook on a disk. Mr. Mueller stated it's believed the Court's ruling is in error and moved for a stay of proceedings for an appeal. COURT ORDERED, stay DENIED; counsel may file an emergency stay. Exhibit Presented (See Worksheet) CUSTODY 2-10-20 1:00 PM JURY TRIAL
DRUFF'S NOTES:
Eric Bensamochan explained the Widdis motion to me: "A Widdis motion is a request by defense counsel to be compensated by the State based on financial inability for the defendant to pay for his defense."
So it looks like Ray is either broke or saying he's broke. and his attorney Craig Mueller filed a Widdis Motion to be paid by the state.
Not sure what they mean by "she (the DA, Ms. Kollins) gave counsel a new return from Facebook on a disk". Seems related to the attempt to track down out-of-state witness Kendall Finley.
02/19/2020 9:30 AM
- Ms. Ramsey advised Mr. Mueller is in Henderson, Ms. Kollins is in Grand Jury and requested a continuance until the 24th. COURT SO ORDERED. CUSTODY 2-24-20 9:30 AM DEFENDANT'S MOTION AND NOTICE OF MOTION FOR REINSTATEMENT OF OWN RECOGNIZANCE RELEASE
It appears this got continued until 2/24 due to the unavailability of both Ray's attorney and the DA. Ray is still trying to get released on own recognizance and have the $500k bail lifted, which I'm guessing won't happen.
Here's a very interesting piece of the whole thing.
On February 3 it said, "Colloquy (conversation) regarding scheduling of Defendant's Motion To Dismiss, Inzunza case and trial readiness."
On radio I wondered what an Inzunza case is.
An attorney who listens to PFA Radio (a different one than Eric B) wrote me this:
Quote:
The "Inzunza case" you mentioned should actually be Raymond's get-out-of-jail-free card. In December 2019, the Nevada Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of a criminal case (also against an alleged child molester, Rigoberto Inzunza) based on violations of Inzunza's 6th Amendment right to a speedy trial. Just like Davis, Inzunza was indicted and had a warrant out for his arrest for over 2 years, but was never arrested due to the LVMPD's gross negligence.
There may be factors that distinguish this case from Davis's (for instance, the State may have offered something to rebut the presumption that the delay prejudiced Davis, whereas they did not for Inzunza), but it's pretty on point.
Wow! Would be amazing if Ray ends up beating this due LVMPD's incompetence regarding not arresting him.
Here's a PDF regarding that case:
New Netflix series?
Making a Pedo?
Kilgore Trout requested an update. No, I'm not kidding. Yes, that Kilgore Trout.
Even though she's banned, I'll oblige.
I bet you forgot about this whole thing until you saw the thread bumped, right? Amazing what a little virus can do.
March 18: Motion to dismiss counsel DENIED
Cliffs: He can't dismiss his lawyer, but his lawyer was told to try to talk with him about mending their differences. How sweet!Quote:
Record made by the Court regarding Defendant's health and the Court's discussions with the jail to make sure Defendant's getting proper care. Argument in support of Motion To Dismiss Counsel by Defendant. Also present, Deputy Public Defender (P.D.) Erika Ballou. Colloquy regarding release of Defendant's records. Continued argument in support of motion by Defendant. Court stated findings and ORDERED, Motion To Dismiss Counsel DENIED. Defendant requested an appeal to the Supreme Court be immediately expedited. Court requested counsel speak with the Defendant in regards to his concerns. Defendant renewed his request to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court expedited.
It also appears that his appeal of that ruling to the Supreme Court was dismissed a week later.
In short, not much action, and I'm wondering if this whole process will slow down further given the virus.
Here's his 31-page (!!) appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court (handwritten), regarding getting his attorney dismissed: http://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/pu...ber%3D20-09036
(Site will make you do a captcha, then send a PDF for download)
The rest of the document -- about 80 pages following his appeal -- contains other documents related to the case, including by the DA and court.
Kilgore Trout was pretty interesting. There was a lot going on there.
Why, I gotta wonder, would she give any shits about Ray Davies? Did she say? That’s kinda curious stuff.
Wasn’t she a lawyer or legal education? Some complaint about sexual abuse while in casino scene, I recall.
I’ve had a lot of difficulty locking onto why we care.
I will second Tellafriend with the RIP KT. Even her choice of name was great.
If jails are
Releasing prisoners are you gonna release her so she can post again?
Marty and Katie freedom ftw
Page 9 of the document I posted claims that, on September 13, 2019, Ray was offered the following plea deal:
- Plead guilty to one count of lewdness (Class E Felony)
- Register as sex offender
- One to four years probation
- No prison time
He refused, so he was charged with 6 felonies and 3 gross misdemeanors.
Ouch.
I really suggest that you read that document which I just posted. Lots of interesting facts about the case. Granted, it's from Ray's point of view, but you can still read it and get a good idea of what was happening.
For example, we thought in September that the "mistrial" thing was a mistake. No, it wasn't. There actually WAS a mistrial declared, due to questions over Ray's mental competence.
Remember we were wondering what kind out outburst occurred to cause it? Well, now we have some clarity.
According to Ray's recent filing, in mid-September 2019, there was a prosecution witness named Chyna Rowles. Not sure who that witness was, or why she was testifying, but Ray claims she kept mistaking him for "a judge" (???), and he kept angrily scolding her for this. Then Ms. Rowles would cry, and the actual judge got pissed at Ray. The judge threatened Ray that he would get 25 days in jail and inability to cross-examine the witness if he made another outburst.
By Ray's own admission, he blurted back to the judge, "You can do that."
The judge shot back, "Yes I can!"
Then Ray claims he tried to get the judge recused from the case, and she refused. Then he claims he tried to get his "standby counsel" to take over representing him (he was representing himself, but was assigned an attorney to help him with procedures and paperwork), and supposedly the judge refused this.
Then the judge asked him if he was competent to stand trail.
Ray answered, "Huh?"
:lol
The judge asked him again. He said "No".
Judge then declared a mistrial and ordered him into competence testing.
Ray claims in his filing that code NRS 178.405 requires a trial to be suspended, not declared a mistrial, in the event of a competence issue. He says this mistrial violated his right to a speedy trial. I'm not sure if this is correct or not.
I sent her the update to this thread and she told me she was IP banned. I asked for her IP so I could unban it, and no response.Quote:
Originally Posted by splitthis
Also, Ray claims on page 26 that the clever attempt to get this dismissed due to the dismissal of the similar Inzunza case in late 2019 was HIS idea, which he figured out by reading Inzunza's story in the newspaper in December. Ray claims he gave the newspaper to Terry King, who brought it to Ray's defense attorney, Craig Mueller.
Even though much of Ray's recent filing bashes Mueller for ignoring him and improperly defending him, he also wrote that "Mueller made a brilliant argument" on February 5 to get the case dismissed.
Laughably, Kenny Flowers, Ray's mild-mannered but buffoonish friend who was frequently featured as comedy relief on Real Grinders, was mentioned in the filing. On page 28, he cited that Flowers was one of the witnesses he attempted to have presented to Mueller, only to have Mueller ignore them. Not sure what he felt Kenny had to offer in his defense.
The judge denied the dismissal based on the Inzunza case on February 6th. The reasoning is interesting.
Starting on page 54, you can read the story as to why Ray wasn't arrested for 2.5 years, despite them being aware of where he was.
The court did indeed conclude that the police were "negligent" regarding allowing this to happen. Apparently a detective named Arturo Martinez left a business card at Ray's Las Vegas apartment in December 2015, saying he wanted to talk to Ray.
Ray called the detective back at the time, and told him he wasn't interested in talking about the matter. Ray was informed that he was being investigated.
Then there was some difficulty locating various witnesses and alleged victims, and this caused a delay. Finally they issued an arrest warrant in October 2016, but it was erroneously assigned to a team which finds and arrests out-of-staters who committed crimes in Nevada.
This was due to the fact that Ray had a California driver's license, and did indeed spend a few months per year in California. Somehow the person assigning it to this team (called "CAT") got confused, and though Ray was an out-of-stater due to his license being from California.
This caused the Vegas police to ignore the fact that Ray was right there in Las Vegas the entire time, and was very public about his location.
:lol
Typical government bureaucratic idiocy.
Anyway, the court agreed that this was the police's fault, and they screwed up.
However, the judge didn't feel this violated Ray's Sixth Amendment rights (to a speedy trial), because during those three years, Ray had no idea there was a warrant out for his arrest. Therefore, he was not burdened by the delay. He was not in jail during any of this time, nor was he experiencing any anxiety regarding knowledge of an imminent arrest.
This differed from the Inzunza case where they went to the guy's mom, said they were looking to arrest him, she gave up all of his personal and work information, and they still didn't arrest him for over a year. Since Inzunza's mom obviously told him he was about to be arrested, he twisted in the wind for over a year knowing it was coming while it took all that time to occur. Furthermore, the State had no response to why this occurred. The court ended up dismissing the case against Inzunza.
Ray, however, wasn't aware he was going to be arrested, and the State did respond by saying that his California license created reasonable confusion. In Inzunza's case, no such excuse for the State existed.
I can understand this, as it's hard to bitch about your rights being violated by an arrest you didn't know was coming taking an extra 2.5 years to occur. Had they told Ray in October 2016, "We're coming to arrest you", and then never did so until April 2019, he probably would have had this case dismissed.
On the other hand, Ray was made aware in December 2015 that he was being investigated, and he went over 3 years without closure in the situation, due to police negligence. Therefore, the state can't claim that he didn't deal with years of additional anxiety over this, as a result of their negligence. He definitely did. I think that's his best argument here, but I don't know if that would be enough to get it dismissed.
View on scribd here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/455265919/
WHY?? Just saying the link was there for anybody to read already posted instead of literally breaking the record for the longest posting in PFA history essentially (Or was that secretly your goal??) If so well played sir.. well played..Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly
Not sure I understand your objection. He embedded it via this forum's scribd function, so people could scroll through all 112 pages at will, without having to bother downloading it. The the same time, it doesn't clutter the forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by ftpjesusWHY?? Just saying the link was there for anybody to read already posted instead of literally breaking the record for the longest posting in PFA history essentially (Or was that secretly your goal??) If so well played sir.. well played..Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly
Good post by him, actually. Saves people trouble.
I was a bit sardonic when I posted that reply because some folks just seem to post long ass responses for no logical reason.. Honestly Druff if I thought you'd wanted it embedded you would've done it yourself and in reply to HockeyGuy if you cant trust Druff posting a link in here I don't know who the hell you can trust just my opinion...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffNot sure I understand your objection. He embedded it via this forum's scribd function, so people could scroll through all 112 pages at will, without having to bother downloading it. The the same time, it doesn't clutter the forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by ftpjesus
Good post by him, actually. Saves people trouble.
This Inzunza case is strange. Would they really just let him walk because of a government fuck up? He might have sexually assaulted a 9 year old.. who cares if the government fucked up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
worry about Russian laws, eurotrashQuote:
Originally Posted by MrTickleThis Inzunza case is strange. Would they really just let him walk because of a government fuck up? He might have sexually assaulted a 9 year old.. who cares if the government fucked up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I agree, and if I were the kid's parents, I would be absolutely furious.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrTickleThis Inzunza case is strange. Would they really just let him walk because of a government fuck up? He might have sexually assaulted a 9 year old.. who cares if the government fucked up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
But yes, if the court determines that they violated his right to a speedy trial (which apparently extends to when the suspect is told they will be arrested), then they have no choice but to kick him loose.
The police should be sued over this. The court in that case found that the failure was "above the level of negligence but didn't rise to the level of malice", so it looks like the delay was intentional but not malicious. In Ray's case, the delay was accidental, albeit stupid and negligent.
My guess with Inzunza (without attempting to research it more, which I don't feel like doing) is that they were about to arrest him, came looking for him at his mom's house, but after his mom gave up his info, they had a change of plans and decided to watch him some more. Or perhaps they decided to stall the arrest so they could build a stronger case. Anyway, the fuckup there was going to his mom and telling her they're going to arrest him, and asking for his whereabouts, then changing their minds. Once they do that, they need to arrest him, since a reasonable person would assume his mom is going to tell him about it.
WOW... read the whole thinggggg.......
IMO he made a error in not accepting deal offered. Register as a S.O. and do the easy time.
I know if u innocent it is Principle.....
but i would have taken the deal regardless after seeing what was in store for me with incompetent lawyers and crooked courts.
This is a travesty and shd have been at it's conclusion lonnnnggg ago...
I sure hopes he gets off and sues the heck outta NV, Las vegas, CC etc.. we see, Time shows all.
I did see a Ms. Sisolak (Gov. daughter?)named as a Pub Def office and she said they are forming a special Defense team?
He won't win any lawsuit. It's pretty hard to win a lawsuit regarding alleged mistreatment during criminal prosecution unless it's really egregious.Quote:
Originally Posted by shoeshine box
Mayyyyyyyyyybe he could have a potentially successful suit regarding the ridiculous $500k bail (which is definitely unjustified), but I could only see him winning this if he's found not guilty. Otherwise he'd just have been exchanging time in jail for time in prison, and honestly the former is a more pleasant place to be.
But yes, this case did feature one idiotic police screwup (the 2.5-year delay in arresting him) and one possible abuse of judicial power (the $500k bail). After reading that lengthy document, I still don't understand the bail thing.
That's not to say Ray didn't fuck this up badly. He did. Whether guilty or innocent, he's not behaving in a calm, reasonable fashion in court, which has directly led to the rest of his problems ever since. There's a good chance he'd be out on bail all this time if he had just behaved normally.
Anyway, only Ray and the alleged victims really know what happened. I have to think there's something to these charges -- that it's not completely fabricated. Maybe some of what is being alleged is exaggerated, but it seems likely that SOMETHING happened with these girls.
If I were in his shoes, I would have also taken the plea deal, unless I knew that I was 100% innocent of everything. Yeah, it sucks registering as a sex offender and having that follow you around for life, but it sure beats spending years in prison (starting from when you're in your 50s) AND registering as a sex offender when you get out.
Yes, Governor Sisolak's daughter is involved here as a public defender, but it looks to me that Ray is being forced to go forward with his current attorney, Craig Mueller.
Not surprisingly, Ray attempted on April 20th what many incarcerated people are attempting in 2020:
Trying to get released due to coronavirus danger in jail.
Unfortunately for Ray, it didn't work.
One of his motions was also dismissed on April 30th at the Nevada Supreme Court.Quote:
Minutes
04/20/2020 10:15 AM
Defendant's Notice Of Motion And Motion For Own Recognizance Release Based On The Changed Circumstances Brought About By The Covid-19 Crisis
- Argument in support of Defendant's Motion For Own Recognizance Release Based On The Changed Circumstances Brought About By The Covid-19 Crisis by Mr. Maynard. Argument in opposition of motion by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, motion DENIED.
He appealed something on May 13th, but I'm not sure what.
Not sure who "Mr. Maynard" is who filed the COVID-19 argument for Ray, since his attorney is named Mueller.
Cliffs: Not much has happened in the past month, Ray tried to get a COVID-19 release, failed, and still sits in jail with the case still open.
I know someone who works in the jail, he said the inmates are purposely given covid to each other in hopes of early release.
Updates:
Quote:
06/24/2020 10:15 AM
- Court stated there's notice Defendant's on medical. Mr. Mueller argued it's not certain the Court has the authority to act as the case is still before the Nevada Supreme Court on a Petition For En Banc Review. Colloquy regarding bar complaint filed by Defendant against Mr. Mueller. COURT ORDERED, proceedings CONTINUED for Defendant's presence. CUSTODY 7-13-20 10:15 AM MOTION TO DISMISS COUNSEL
07/13/2020 10:15 AM
- Mr. Mueller stated that he was willing to withdraw. Court clarified with the Deft. that he wanted to dismiss his counsel and ORDERED MOTION GRANTED. Court further, APPOINTED Mr. Gill to represent the Deft. The Deft. stated that he did not want Mr. Gill to represent him, wanted to waive his right to representation and would represent himself. Court advised Deft. that he is not able to represent himself because he refuses to follow Court rules and procedures further advising him that he may obtain his own counsel to represent him. COURT ORDERED, MATTER SET FOR CONFIRMATION OF COUNSEL. CUSTODY 7/20/20 10:15 AM CONFIRMATION OF COUNSEL
07/20/2020 10:15 AM
- Present on behalf of the State via video, Stacey Kollins. Officer stated Defendant's on medical. COURT ORDERED, proceedings CONTINUED. CUSTODY 8-3-20 10:15 AM MOTION TO DISMISS COUNSEL
So here's what I can make of this:
On June 20, there was more discussion regarding dismissing Ray's attorney Craig Mueller, and a discussion of a state bar complaint Ray filed against him. It was continued to July 13.
On July 13, Mueller stated he was okay with being dismissed (no surprise), and the court granted it, and then appointed an attorney named Adam Gill to defend him. Ray said he didn't want Adam Gill, and wanted to defend himself. The court refused to allow this, stating that Ray already tried to defend himself and made a mess of everything. However, Ray was told he could hire someone else instead of Mr. Gill, whom I assume was appointed to him for free.
On July 20, it said Ray is on "medical" (??), and the dismissal proceedings would continue on August 3, which is weird because I thought the matter was already decided upon on July 13. However, I also see that the August hearing was "vacated - per law clerk".
The best I can make of this is that Ray is now being represented by Adam Gill, but not much else has changed.
Maybe he has the RonaQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
IMO, he is being held in the Med. ward due to a nervous breakdown..
My bro had same desig... in CCDC... Imo... wish him well, hope he did not do this stuff.. IMO he made a huge error representing himself...The Court is predjudiced Vs A person being their own Lawyer....
I hope Kenny's ok.
I’m sure the victims have proof and hope he pays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweetpinkcandy08
what if he is innocent? what then? how does one get compensated for false internment?(sp?).....
almost 1 yr in jail w/no trial..wowza
and yes if he is guilty as charged put him under the jail...
well Wed Sept 9th we find out when he shows up in Court next..been a year ...released with time served my best bet.imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by shoeshine boxQuote:
Originally Posted by Sweetpinkcandy08
what if he is innocent? what then? how does one get compensated for false internment?(sp?).....
almost 1 yr in jail w/no trial..wowza
and yes if he is guilty as charged put him under the jail...
Denied and will be going to court in October.Quote:
Originally Posted by shoeshine boxwell Wed Sept 9th we find out when he shows up in Court next..been a year ...released with time served my best bet.imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by shoeshine box
BUMP
We have a result, folks.
Here's 9 hours of today's hearing, some of which is redacted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D72WIqfB58M
At around the 7 hour 26 minute mark, you can start seeing the slides of the summary of the allegations against him.
Jump to 8:27:30 to hear the result. (Or click the Spoiler button below.)
So let it be written, so let it be done.
This just happened today at around 4pm. It is not in the press anywhere, and this YouTube video is unlisted.
Guess the chomo wins. He managed to avoid being labeled a sex offender after all. Now his buddy Terry King can say see I told you he wasn’t a child molester. Yes Terry yes he is. Just boils down that after dragging shit out needlessly he got an Atty to basically pull a Micon and got a slap on the wrist essentially.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Did they have actual communications from Facebook on the screen? I couldn’t get a good look - looked like it just said Raymond Davis and a time stamp and then possibly victim name and a time stamp ... Is that correct? Or were the actual messages displayed?
Need Druff’s breakdown on radio of exactly what he think happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ftpjesusGuess the chomo wins. He managed to avoid being labeled a sex offender after all. Now his buddy Terry King can say see I told you he wasn’t a child molester. Yes Terry yes he is. Just boils down that after dragging shit out needlessly he got an Atty to basically pull a Micon and got a slap on the wrist essentially.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Please you wrong about Terry King..
She shall say no such thing...
How dare you insinuate it...
I even stuck up for him 'til Court proceedings ended & was over.
Alas after watching these Proceedings, well....
I shan't be saying any more on this subject...
to be clear & simple, I just Unfollowed RealGrinders on FB.....
Terry a decent Person ..Please refrain from attacking her. Ty..Shoeshine Box..