Barisone KROL this Friday, 5/26

[LilRanger]

@ekat

Ms Vertetis then appealed her sentence. Last week the Appellate Court issued their ruling on her appeal and…her sentence has been vacated, the case remanded and she is to be resentenced by a different judge.

The decision is 25 pages long. I’m attaching it for anyone that wants to read it. It is certainly interesting.

Here’s a highlight:

Hard to fathom Judge T making a ruling that is unsupported by evidence, isn’t it? /S

Eeee! That’s a black mark indeed!

[ekat]

@LilRanger

Eeee! That’s a black mark indeed!

To be overturned twice in the same case is something. To see language like that is something else.

And Michael Barisone’s appeal of the initial Krol commitment (Judge Taylor) is working its way, slowly, to be heard by that same Appellate court.

Very, very interesting.

[trubandloki]

Wow. So Judge Taylor just simply does not like to follow the rules and does his own thing, twice now with the same lawyer. That sure does not make him look good at all.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

Changing the subject from a 14 month old verdict that we have beaten beyond death…

At various times over the last year, we have (briefly) discussed the case of Virginia Vertetis. A very quick summary: Ed Bilinkas defended her in Judge Taylor’s Court. She was convicted. Her conviction was overturned on appeal, as the Appellate Court determined Judge Taylor had erred in the jury instructions.

Ms Vertetis subsequently took a plea. And, Judge Taylor did Judge Taylor things and sentenced her to 20 years, No Early Release.

Ms Vertetis then appealed her sentence. Last week the Appellate Court issued their ruling on her appeal and…her sentence has been vacated, the case remanded and she is to be resentenced by a different judge.

The decision is 25 pages long. I’m attaching it for anyone that wants to read it. It is certainly interesting.

Here’s a highlight:

Hard to fathom Judge T making a ruling that is unsupported by evidence, isn’t it? /S

Vertitis sentence appeal.pdf (164.3 KB)

When her conviction was thrown out due to the incorrect jury instructions, she was offered a plea deal but could have turned it down and been retried.

If the prosecutor offered a plea deal of plead guilty to xxx and spend 20 years in prison, how is Taylor determining the sentence?

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

When her conviction was thrown out due to the incorrect jury instructions, she was offered a plea deal but could have turned it down and been retried.

If the prosecutor offered a plea deal of plead guilty to xxx and spend 20 years in prison, how is Taylor determining the sentence?

I don’t really feel compelled to answer your question, especially since the answer is in the document I linked.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Mondo

@eggbutt

It’s my understanding an appeal IS possible due to Not Guilty being denied as a defense via a case Handy vs NJ (I think). It’s whether Barisone has the desire and money to fight the battle just to prove a point.

I think you mean Self-Defense being denied. Not, Not Guilty.

He had two pleas, NG by reason of self defense and NGRI.

Since the jury gave him what he pled (NGRI), I don’t think he can appeal the fact that the jury did not go with NG self defense.

(Also, small point, there is no evidence that he acted in self defense.)

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

When her conviction was thrown out due to the incorrect jury instructions, she was offered a plea deal but could have turned it down and been retried.

If the prosecutor offered a plea deal of plead guilty to xxx and spend 20 years in prison, how is Taylor determining the sentence?

I don’t really feel compelled to answer your question, especially since the answer is in the document I linked.

Thanks for linking the document.

She agreed to plead guilty to first degree manslaughter with a sentence recommendation of 20 years without parole if the prosecutor dropped the gun charges, but part of the plea deal was that she could argue tor a sentence of less than 20 years.

Taylor went exactly with the recommended sentence in the plea deal (20 years with no parole), rather than something less.

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Thanks for linking the document.

She agreed to plead guilty to first degree manslaughter with a sentence recommendation of 20 years without parole if the prosecutor dropped the gun charges, but part of the plea deal was that she could argue tor a sentence of less than 20 years.

Taylor went exactly with the recommended sentence in the plea deal (20 years with no parole), rather than something less.

And the appellate court ruled that he erred. And vacated the sentence and remanded to a different judge. Because he was wrong, and based his decision in part “on factual findings that were unsupported by competent, credible evidence in the record.”

And now a different judge gets to sentence her because he was wrong.

[Knights_Mom]

@ekat

Changing the subject from a 14 month old verdict that we have beaten beyond death…

At various times over the last year, we have (briefly) discussed the case of Virginia Vertetis. A very quick summary: Ed Bilinkas defended her in Judge Taylor’s Court. She was convicted. Her conviction was overturned on appeal, as the Appellate Court determined Judge Taylor had erred in the jury instructions.

Ms Vertetis subsequently took a plea. And, Judge Taylor did Judge Taylor things and sentenced her to 20 years, No Early Release.

Ms Vertetis then appealed her sentence. Last week the Appellate Court issued their ruling on her appeal and…her sentence has been vacated, the case remanded and she is to be resentenced by a different judge.

The decision is 25 pages long. I’m attaching it for anyone that wants to read it. It is certainly interesting.

Here’s a highlight:

Hard to fathom Judge T making a ruling that is unsupported by evidence, isn’t it? /S

Vertitis sentence appeal.pdf (164.3 KB)

This is significant in my eyes.

[Knights_Mom]

@ekat

@LilRanger

Eeee! That’s a black mark indeed!

To be overturned twice in the same case is something. To see language like that is something else.

And Michael Barisone’s appeal of the initial Krol commitment (Judge Taylor) is working its way, slowly, to be heard by that same Appellate court.

Very, very interesting.

I’m thinking Taylor didn’t always behave this way on the bench or he wouldn’t be where he is. I’m thinking this is indicative of a change in his judicial temperament which may point to the start of age related cognitive difficulties. He may be at the start of a decline. Which explains his copious note taking.

(Anyone ever notice the first sign is often a person getting ornery, then forgetting things and being angry?)

[Mersidoats]

@Knights_Mom

Anyone ever notice the first sign is often a person getting ornery, then forgetting things and being angry?)

My family is living this right now, with my grandmother. It really is the first sign. And it continues. It’s almost a defense mechanism, maybe?

[Mondo]

@CurrentlyHorseless

He had two pleas, NG by reason of self defense and NGRI.

Once again, patently false. The judge did not permit them to enter the Self Defense plea.

[Mondo]

@CurrentlyHorseless

(Also, small point, there is no evidence that he acted in self defense.)

(Also, small point, there is no evidence that he didn’t.)

[DownYonder]

@Knights_Mom

(Anyone ever notice the first sign is often a person getting ornery, then forgetting things and being angry?)

@Mersidoats

My family is living this right now, with my grandmother. It really is the first sign. And it continues. It’s almost a defense mechanism, maybe?

Oh yes. Several family members including my father. I think they know something isn’t right, they sense their mental acuity may be declining, and they lash out at those around them. They aren’t angry with THEM per se, but rather angry at the universe - if that makes sense.

[Knights_Mom]

@Mersidoats

@Knights_Mom

Anyone ever notice the first sign is often a person getting ornery, then forgetting things and being angry?)

My family is living this right now, with my grandmother. It really is the first sign. And it continues. It’s almost a defense mechanism, maybe?

I’m sorry. It’s incredibly hard on family especially once the abuse really starts.

[Knights_Mom]

@DownYonder

@Knights_Mom

(Anyone ever notice the first sign is often a person getting ornery, then forgetting things and being angry?)

@Mersidoats

My family is living this right now, with my grandmother. It really is the first sign. And it continues. It’s almost a defense mechanism, maybe?

Oh yes. Several family members including my father. I think they know something isn’t right, they sense their mental acuity may be declining, and they lash out at those around them. They aren’t angry with THEM per se, but rather angry at the universe - if that makes sense.

Perfect sense.

I’ve been in many hearings and judges aren’t usually like that. You may come across an ornery one from time to time but Taylor was over the top.

Let’s see if he makes it to 70 before he has to retire.

[BrownDerby]

Yes, I’ve lived it. And the physical strength when they argue with you. It is devasting.

[trubandloki]

@ekat

Because he was wrong, and based his decision in part “on factual findings that were unsupported by competent, credible evidence in the record.”

Darn, doesn’t that wording really fit what Judge Taylor did to Michael at his first Krol hearing?

[ekat]

@trubandloki

Darn, doesn’t that wording really fit what Judge Taylor did to Michael at his first Krol hearing?

Based on what I have read, why yes, it sure does.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if Michael’s initial commitment got sent back to a different judge as well?

[Knights_Mom]

@trubandloki

@ekat

Because he was wrong, and based his decision in part “on factual findings that were unsupported by competent, credible evidence in the record.”

Darn, doesn’t that wording really fit what Judge Taylor did to Michael at his first Krol hearing?

Yup you can bet your Sweet Grass on it.