At a May 31 hearing, the State argued that they should be allowed to say in opening argument that the crimes stopped after Mark’s arrested. Seriously? As if PPD would attribute any crimes to the Baseline crimes after Mark’s arrest. Judge Granville agreed and said their motion was “a bridge too far.” Prosecutors will not be allowed to say that in opening argument, nor during trial.
Note: Let’s not forget one month after Mark’s arrest, Terry Wayne Smith was arrested for beating up an elderly man at a bus stop, and has been incarcerated ever since.
Popular Posts
-
Department of Public Safety Lorraine Heath said that the probability of the DNA being anyone else’s DNA other than Mark’s was 1 in 36...
-
The following is a fictional interview with Baseline task force lead investigator, Phoenix Police detective Alejandro Femenia. The inter... -
...I did them no wrong, but they laid a trap for me. I did them no wrong, but they dug a pit to catch me. …Malicious witnesses tes...
-
Department of Public Safety DNA Analyst, Lorraine Heath, claims her strongest DNA partial profile was from a woman’s breast, who was face do...
-
. . . when her lips are moving. Yesterday lead prosecutor, Suzanne Cohen, even lies in her opening argument in a court of law. In an e... -
Letter from Ofc Rusty Stuart where he writes of his repeated efforts to have Terry Wayne Smith investigated further by the Baseline task for...
-
One thing that Mark and I learned at the Lara trial in 2007 is that you cannot count on the truth being told. Information is repressed, wate...
-
It’s true the audio lineup tapes are being admitted as evidence and we can hardly believe it. Three years after her attack, PPD compiles 6 a...
-
Yes, it’s true. DNA evidence that exonerates Mark has been presented at trial – by the State no less. They just choose to ignore it. One ...
-
Pete Ochoa – Ritzz Catering (Report from 2010 trial) I do not know or understand why people like Pete Ochoa willfully boldface lie on the ...