Even if they were ready to go to trial, seating a jury in person is largely not happening right now. Interim hearings, depositions, and other related things can go forward by Zoom if both sides consent.
NJ Supreme Court is considering actions for certain prisoners due to COVID. They are pushing the constitutional rights of the innocent until proven guilty.
Some states did release a lot of prisoners due to Covid. With respect to Barisone, his charges are first degree, aren’t they?
California is prioritizing the prison population for the vaccine. Not above nursing home residents or health care workers, but definitely above me.
I would think that at this point, Barisone is likely to get the vaccine soon but not likely to be released.
Feb 16, 2021
Thank you for the update @MorganSercu
wow…still waiting until April then for more news.
Hes going to make a plea deal then??
Which he are you referring to?
The article says the state (I assume that is who is actually prosecuting) is deciding on what plea deal to offer. At least that is how I read it. I does not say if Barisone will accept a plea deal.
yeah that was poorly worded. I meant offered a plea.
I think when you do a plea deal (which means pleading guilty to a lesser charge than originally given ) there is no trial, and therefore no public airing of evidence. So the many questions we all have from following this case will never be definitively answered.
I just completed jury duty. I only had to serve 2 days which was good. I don’t know how I would do with a longer trial during Covid. We wore masks and our chairs had plexiglass partitions around the back and sides. It made using the chair armrests very uncomfortable and I felt claustrophobic. The judge, the attorneys and witnesses had a little better set up with more room and spaced farther apart even though they still had the partitions.
Some wore masks and others wore face shields. They were going to make us wear the face shields so they could see our expressions but we ended up with just the masks. They had to see how uncomfortable we were though. The guy next to me tugged on his mask the whole time and shifted constantly. Others were whining. By the end of the day I had a headache and was ready to convict everyone in the room.
One thing that did make an impression on me was that the attorneys should have looked at themselves with their masks on. One had a round emblem on his mask right over his mouth and it made his lips look bigger. My nickname for him was fish lips. Another had one that was pointed in front. He was bird man. A witness had the shield and it made his hair stick straight up. I called him Rod Stewart.
I feel for anyone who would have to have their trial during this period regardless of which side they were on. It was very interesting to see the legal process but Covid definitely complicated things-at least for me.
Hopefully a resolution can be found for this case that will work for all parties involved.
But Barisone owns the evidence he paid to have gathered, right? Is it like HIPAA? His attorney can’t discuss it, but he can if he wishes, as he was the primary party (or patient) - is that correct?
Not that I expect anyone to do a data dump. Simply curious.
I’ve never followed a guilty plea or plea bargain where the evidence was made clearly and verifiable public like it is in a full trial. In general too, when you make a plea bargain you are agreeing to plead guilty to a lesser charge than the evidence seems to warrant, and the prosecutor is saved an expensive trial. I cannot see where it would be worth it for the accused person to make their evidence fully public because it might make the public respond that the prosecutor let them off too easily.
If the evidence shows that the charges were unfounded, then the charges would be dropped or the accused would insist on a court trial that would likely aquit them.
If you are charged with attempted murder and then offered a plea bargain to plead guilty to, say, aggravated assault, the last thing you are going to do is then release all your data to be retried in the court of public opinion on social media.
That makes sense, although I don’t see why a defendant would care how the public would respond to a prosecutor offering a deal. I can see why a defendant wouldn’t want their own dirty laundry aired (but a prosecutor couldn’t do that after offering the plea deal - can they?).
Again, it doesn’t matter. I’m simply interested in how the rules of privacy apply to the defendant and the prosecutor.
And, of course, just because a plea deal is offered doesn’t mean the defendant has to accept it if a jury or bench trial is desired. Is that correct? Not saying it makes the most sense for any defendant. But clients don’t always take the advice of their attorneys for a variety of reasons.
I think a plea deal is negotiated behind closed doors and only the final agreement is announced. Yes, people do turn them down if they think they stand a good choice of being exonerated in court, or of course if they are truly innocent.
My point was just that we had all been expecting some clarification to all the conflicting stories during the trial, but a plea deal means none of that material will come to light. However, there may be material that is very useful in making the prosecutor decide to let him plead guilty to a lesser offense rather than go through with the full trial for attempted murder.
I think it depends on the defendant. Some go and put it all out there, some just want to get on with their lives. It may also depend on whether a civil suit is in the works too.
I think that New Jersey needs to clarify its self-defense laws. On the CourtTV website, the Vertetis case (Same judge and attorney I believe as MB’s) is discussed as the woman is being granted a new trial because the judge improperly instructed the jury on the laws of self defense and a duty to retreat.
If a judge is going to get confused about the law how is the average citizen supposed to know how to act and what is and isn’t legal. The article was interesting to read if anyone wants to go to the website and look it up.
Yes, and the plaintiff will also have a say in the plea deal. At lease from my experience that is how it works.
I was the victim in a similar trial, and they were going to offer a deal to the man, but they approached me first to see if I was ok with it. Which, I sure as H was not. I said I’m not agreeing to any plea unless its the original charge. None of this lessening the charge BS. They went back to the guy and he agreed to plead guilty on the original charge but then they dropped some of his other charges (stock pile of illegal weapons).
It all happened that morning, before the trial was supposed to start. I’m not sure why, if it was because the guy was refusing to even talk a plea until that moment or what but the whole scene was scary and stressful but in the end worked out. My support worker for this, said she was SO happy I stood my ground, because usually they bully everyone to avoid trial as much as they can.
which there definitely is a civil suit!
Have there been any additional stuff happen in that case?
(I would look myself but I have always struggled finding the information even when the kind people here help me.)
I dont know what you mean