agoraphobichousewife:

04/14/14 Order Regarding Defendant’s Motion to Reconsider Findings Made in Order P-68 (D-200) Denied
Big News: In this Court Order the defense are essentially quoted as saying the report favors them. 
It’s safe to say the court ordered sanity exam concluded that James Holmes was INSANE during the the July 20th, 2012 theater shootings.
This Court Order is in response to the defense’s motion for the Court to reconsider it’s ruling on P-68.
Backstory:
In P-68 the court ruled -at the prosecution’s request- that James Holmes undergo another (partial) sanity exam.The prosecution originally alleged that the first doctor was biased, and said their experts had noticed “numerous deficiencies” in the first eval.
Judge Samour found that the first doctor was NOT biased at the time of the exam, but that the report was “incomplete and inadequate” so he ordered another exam (but only like a additional, partial exam-  the new exam is only to be focused on one of the three main areas that were evaluated during the first exam).
The defense then asked Samour to reconsider the additional exam in a undisclosed, suppressed motion, but, in this Order, Samour quotes what the defense previously said in that motion in order to respond to the allegations.
From this Order:
"Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the Court did not conclude, "essentially"or otherwise, “that a sanity examination is inadequate or unfair unless it satisfies every area of interest identified by the prosecution’s experts.”
“The defendant erroneously implies that the Court understood the insanity statutory scheme to require it "to give the prosecution the guaranteed ability to rebut the insanity defense if the results of the examination favor the defendant.”
“It is equally inaccurate to insinuate that the Court believed it had "cart blanche to continue to order additional examinations"indefinitely”until a sanity examiner finally produces a report that is immune from criticism by people who are paid to find fault in it.” 
“Although the defendant posits that the Court took "a role which [gives] the impression of impartiality" and an Order that creates an "appearance of impartiality", the Court agreed with each party in part and disagreed with each party in part. The Court agreed with the prosecution that a further or other examination was warranted, but agreed with the defendant that the prosecution’s experts should not be allowed to conduct it.”
(^Oh, please. Look at Samour trying to act like that was siding with the defense. It’s bullshit - there’s NO WAY he could have agreed with the prosecution fully in their request or else it would have looked something like this: Judge Samour: Up next we will go over the second court-ordered, totally neutral, not-biased-in-any-way examination conducted by the prosecution’s hand picked experts…. There was zero chance of that motion ever being granted in full, and everyone knows that, so he shouldn’t act like he was throwing them a bone then, just to be able to claim impartiality now.)
And there’s more about why the original doctor, Dr. Metzner, wasn’t choosen to conduct the new additional exam. (Spoiler alert: It’s basically, “even though Dr. Metzner says he could still work with us [the prosecution], it’s only naturalthat he would be biased against us now. 
From the closed hearings:



(Keep in mind that this is alleged bias was completely caused by the prosecution calling a shady meeting with the Dr. under false pretenses and then trying to twist his words against him to allege he was biased at the time of the report.) See below:
After the evaluation was complete and Metzner had written his report, prosecutors asked to speak with him. Although Samour’s order doesn’t say what that discussion entailed, it does say that Metzner was “surprised” by it. According to the order, he testified at a closed-door hearing in January that he felt “blindsided” and “set up” by the prosecutors, who used what he told them to allege that he had an “unfair bias.” Metzner didn’t feel the meeting was “fair” since he wasn’t informed of its purpose ahead of time. [Source]
(Also keep in mind Judge Samour later found Dr. Metzner was NOT biased during the exam. So the prosecution’s initial allegations of bias stemming from the meeting were BS)

agoraphobichousewife:

04/14/14 Order Regarding Defendant’s Motion to Reconsider Findings Made in Order P-68 (D-200) Denied

Big News: In this Court Order the defense are essentially quoted as saying the report favors them.

It’s safe to say the court ordered sanity exam concluded that James Holmes was INSANE during the the July 20th, 2012 theater shootings.

This Court Order is in response to the defense’s motion for the Court to reconsider it’s ruling on P-68.

Backstory:

In P-68 the court ruled -at the prosecution’s request- that James Holmes undergo another (partial) sanity exam.The prosecution originally alleged that the first doctor was biased, and said their experts had noticed “numerous deficiencies” in the first eval.

Judge Samour found that the first doctor was NOT biased at the time of the exam, but that the report was “incomplete and inadequate” so he ordered another exam (but only like a additional, partial exam-  the new exam is only to be focused on one of the three main areas that were evaluated during the first exam).

The defense then asked Samour to reconsider the additional exam in a undisclosed, suppressed motion, but, in this Order, Samour quotes what the defense previously said in that motion in order to respond to the allegations.

From this Order:

"Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the Court did not conclude, "essentially"or otherwise, “that a sanity examination is inadequate or unfair unless it satisfies every area of interest identified by the prosecution’s experts.”

The defendant erroneously implies that the Court understood the insanity statutory scheme to require it "to give the prosecution the guaranteed ability to rebut the insanity defense if the results of the examination favor the defendant.”

It is equally inaccurate to insinuate that the Court believed it had "cart blanche to continue to order additional examinations"indefinitelyuntil a sanity examiner finally produces a report that is immune from criticism by people who are paid to find fault in it.” 

Although the defendant posits that the Court took "a role which [gives] the impression of impartiality" and an Order that creates an "appearance of impartiality", the Court agreed with each party in part and disagreed with each party in part. The Court agreed with the prosecution that a further or other examination was warranted, but agreed with the defendant that the prosecution’s experts should not be allowed to conduct it.”

(^Oh, please. Look at Samour trying to act like that was siding with the defense. It’s bullshit - there’s NO WAY he could have agreed with the prosecution fully in their request or else it would have looked something like this: Judge Samour: Up next we will go over the second court-ordered, totally neutral, not-biased-in-any-way examination conducted by the prosecution’s hand picked experts…. There was zero chance of that motion ever being granted in full, and everyone knows that, so he shouldn’t act like he was throwing them a bone then, just to be able to claim impartiality now.)

And there’s more about why the original doctor, Dr. Metzner, wasn’t choosen to conduct the new additional exam. (Spoiler alert: It’s basically, “even though Dr. Metzner says he could still work with us [the prosecution], it’s only naturalthat he would be biased against us now. 

From the closed hearings:

(Keep in mind that this is alleged bias was completely caused by the prosecution calling a shady meeting with the Dr. under false pretenses and then trying to twist his words against him to allege he was biased at the time of the report.) See below:

  • After the evaluation was complete and Metzner had written his report, prosecutors asked to speak with him. Although Samour’s order doesn’t say what that discussion entailed, it does say that Metzner was “surprised” by it. According to the order, he testified at a closed-door hearing in January that he felt “blindsided” and “set up” by the prosecutors, who used what he told them to allege that he had an “unfair bias.” Metzner didn’t feel the meeting was “fair” since he wasn’t informed of its purpose ahead of time. [Source]

(Also keep in mind Judge Samour later found Dr. Metzner was NOT biased during the exam. So the prosecution’s initial allegations of bias stemming from the meeting were BS)

agoraphobichousewife:

04/15/14 Motion to Provide Defense with Unredacted Copies of Court Orders [D-209]

The defense were cruising on the Denver post last night and were “shocked” to see them discussing Orders that they, the defense, hadn’t even received yet. They are requesting that the Court “immediately” give them unredacted copies of those Orders.

04/15/14 Order Regarding Defendant’s Motion to Provide Defense with Unredacted Copies of Court Orders (D-209)

Judge Samour blames it on the defense’s email system, but will try sending the Orders again.

04/15/14 Order Suppressing Notice of Jury Selection Issues the People Would Like to Discuss at the May 5th and 6th Court Hearings (P-77) 

 The Court agrees. Accordingly, it is suppressed.

agoraphobichousewife:

04/14/14 Order Regarding Further Sanity Examination (C-94)
The instructions for the additional sanity exam.

agoraphobichousewife:

04/14/14 Order Regarding Further Sanity Examination (C-94)

The instructions for the additional sanity exam.

Defense attorneys also accused Samour of “endeavoring to assist the prosecution’s experts, and affirmatively help the prosecution win its case,” the order stated.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25566396/tension-heightens-between-judge-and-defense-theater-shooting

Obviously the defense agrees the Judge is siding with the prosecution time and time again.  

Fair trial?  I think not as long as Samour is the Judge.  

Order Regarding Defendant’s Motion to Reconsider Findings Made in Order P-68 (D-200)

Order Regarding Further Sanity Examination (C-94)

My favorite blog!  
http://agoraphobichousewife.tumblr.com




Arapahoe County District Judge Carlos A. Samour Jr. said he would keep the new examination on hold in case Holmes’ lawyers wanted to appeal his order. He also agreed to modify his instructions to the psychiatrist for the new evaluation to address some of the defense attorneys’ concerns, but the instructions were not made public.

Holmes pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to charges of killing 12 people and injuring 70 in the July 2012 attack on an audience watching “The Dark Knight Rises” in the Denver suburb of Aurora. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

The writing on Holmes’ parking spot.

thejhcaseresearch:

So according to the peeps I keep in touch with, the writing on Holmes’ parking spot behind the theater, looks to have been done by land surveyors. According to what I’ve been told, it seems that a building next to the theater is about to be turned into a church lol. 

Keep trying people… that theater is still always gonna have an eerie feeling whenever people go to it lol. 

thejhcaseresearch:

So I have a birdy who sent this to me. Which is pretty cool, because they’re local to the area and can certainly keep up with things.

Am I going crazy or was there something written on Holmes’ parking spot very recently? It looks like it to me. Got me a little curious about what that’s all about. But other than that, enjoy the walk around of the theater guys.

james-holmes-files:

James Eagan Holmes
A decline into insanity
Never give up hope

james-holmes-files:

James Eagan Holmes

A decline into insanity

Never give up hope

These stories focused on the tragedy that hit the victims in this case as well as some of the healing that has taken place. In covering the good and courageous things the victims have done, the coverage often simplistically and inaccurately implied that Mr. Holmes was “evil”, as opposed to mentally ill.

agoraphobichousewife:

It’s funny because the article explains the defense’s motion very well. That the trial should be moved because prejudicial extensive media coverage in the area has tainted the jury pool….

From the article:

The media coverage has been in-depth, Holmes’s attorneys argue, including “graphic and sensational firsthand accounts” of the crime and “blow-by-blow” reporting of the preliminary hearing, at which the prosecution presented some of its evidence. And they don’t like how Holmes — or his defense — has been portrayed.

"On numerous occasions, the legitimate defense of insanity was not described as such," they write. "Rather, it was described as Mr. Holmes’s ‘best hope of avoiding the death penalty, and possibly his only hope, given the weight of the evidence.’"

Holmes’s attorneys also point out that the media has published the opinions of victims and family members who believe that Holmes is “not crazy” and deserves the death penalty. The motion even quotes from anti-Holmes comments left by readers, including this one: “What a total waste of resources and time! This moron is guilty!”

……and then the comments at the bottom of this article just serve to further prove the defense counsel’s point:

Yah right the dude should be burned like a ” witch ” if he’s that crazy those families need closure … Not the notion that he’s gonna be on trial for 4 more fucking years … Idiots.”

Just kill the fucker and quit wasting our tax money on a waste of oxygen!

Kill that dude already.

Why is this even still going on. Just wasting our money on the fuckin psycho. They know he did it. He said he did it. End of Story… Fry his ass!

You can run but you cant hide.

And again going after the defense:

"They don’t have much of a defense, therefore they figure the longer they can postpone a trial the better off they will be.

(^Never mind that trial would have started last February if the prosecution hadn’t requested another neutral, court-ordered sanity exam because they didn’t like the results of the first. I hate when people comment on the case when they clearly don’t follow it.)

bluethunderr:

Its our woman in the red dress, from way back when! Christ, someone section her already, before we end up with a library full of bodies. 

"When the Court wrongly denigrates defense counsel in its orders for filing ‘frivolous’ motions, it improperly undermines the important role of defense counsel in our adversarial system and incorrectly portrays defense counsel as wasting the Court’s time," the filing read.

But Samour quickly shot back on Friday, and said none of the motions he denied in March sought to change existing death penalty laws and they failed to present legitimate arguments.

"Instead, his motions urged the Court to disregard binding case law directly on point," he wrote.

Motion to Reconsider Court’s Rulings that Certain Motions filed by the Defense are ‘Frivolous’ [D-208]

Order Regarding Defendant’s Motion to Reconsider Court’s Ruling that Certain Motions Filed by the Defense are Frivolous (D-208)

Looks like Samour gave the defense the big Fuck You once again.