Evidence Discrepancy

[quincy]

So a WhatsApp chat from a phone number that does not belong to the submitted device does not seem acceptable to you? This a far cry from not liking the outcome.

Who are you in all of this? A student trying to get forum members to answer a class assignment, or the defendant, or a relative of the defendant, or just someone with time on his hands?

 

[quincy]

A troll, obviously. Reported and requested thread deletion.

I already reported the thread.

 

[FreeMauMau]

I'm not going this subs

And now you have nicely added the “essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt,” to correct your previously incorrect statement.

Who are you in all of this?

Your the one who who mentioned the substantial evidence standard, which was irrelevant. Explain how my identity is relevant to whether a court can admit a WhatsApp chat that does not belong to the only phone device in evidence?

You can try to run around the question by asing my blood type or screaming "is that a plane, is that a bird in the sky" but it doesn't change the question nor does it answer it.(Whether a WhatsApp chat that does not belong to the suibmitted device is admissable)

I'm guessing is a question above your technological knowledge as you don't know the workings.

 

[FreeMauMau]

So I'm a troll because you don't understand how a webchat works. G

I already reported the thread.

You assume I'm a troll because you cannot understand the workings of a webchat. Genius!

No sweat off my back, it just shows your ignorance when it comes to these type of events in real life.

 

[quincy]

So I'm a troll because you don't understand how a webchat works. G

You assume I'm a troll because you cannot understand the workings of a webchat. Genius!

No sweat off my back, it just shows your ignorance when it comes to these type of events in real life.

Who are you in relation to the case you are interested in?

An opposing party can challenge evidence and can question an expert witness. A conviction can be appealed. Other than that, I don’t know what else you expect anyone here to tell you.

Being rude to those from whom you seek answers is not the best way to get the answers you seek. This is something you should have learned when you were a toddler.

 

[FreeMauMau]

I'm not sure how you determine rudeness from reading a question. There is no tone. It would seem like an implicit bias you may have in reading a simple question.

 

[quincy]

I'm not sure how you determine rudeness from reading a question. There is no tone. It would seem like an implicit bias you may have in reading a simple question.

If you say so.

 

[FreeMauMau]

Likewise

 

[quincy]

 

[Taxing Matters]

I just wanted advice on how the judicial system would right that sort of a wrong. But I see there's none in place, at least according to the above advice.

The defendant has a number of rights, and those are explained to the defendant before trial. The facts you put in your post suggests that the defendant did not avail himself of those rights and decided to be his own lawyer. If that's the case that would explain some of possible errors in your post. Representing himself, he still must follow the rules of procedure and evidence like a lawyer does. If the defendant didn't raise any objection to introduction of the phone number that you are putting so much effort upon, then the defendant is deemed to have waived that objection and the prosecutor may go ahead and present it. If the pro se defendant failed to challenge the expert witnesses during cross examination about the phone number issue during trial, then the judge would likely know there was any problem with it. The pro se party cannot expect the judge to cure every mistake the pro se party makes. That's not the role of the judge. The judge is supposed to be a neutral arbiter in the case, and helping out one side to better make his case is not being neutral.

So a WhatsApp chat from a phone number that does not belong to the submitted device does not seem acceptable to you? This a far cry from not liking the outcome.

Did the defendant object to the introduction of that information prior to the judge admitting it into evidence? If the defendant did not do that and WhatsApp chat was as critical to the case as you make it out to be, why didn't the defendant raise that objection? Once admitted did the defendant in cross examination drill into the issue to highlight to the judge what the problem was with it? If not, why not?

The defendant is entitled to a fair trial and is given a lot of opportunities the criminal pre-trial and trial process to assert his rights and present his case. But he has to actively assert those rights and opportunities that the law and court rules make available to him. If a piece of evidence that is not admissible is offered by the prosecution, the defendant has make his objection right at the time the prosecutor seeks to present it so the judge can rule on the matter. If the defendant doesn't do that that's on him. He can't later complain of it when he didn't raise the issue at trial. A pro se defendant has to take ownership of his defense and do the things a defense lawyer would have done for him. If he screws it up, then the only person to blame for that is himself.

If the defendant didn't have a lawyer, why did he either not hire one or, if unable to afford one, ask the court to appoint a lawyer to represent him? If he made the choice to go without a lawyer, that was likely his biggest mistake, and there isn't anything that can be done about that after the trial.

 

[FreeMauMau]

Wow thank you. I did have an attorney, I explained the dicrpencies and he should call a WhatsApp expert, I explained that it was a web chat and it is not the same as a cellphone text. Meaning that anyone could impersonate or spoof a phone number.

The attorney said he didn't understand what I was telling him and agreed to stipulate the whatapp chat. I didn't know what stipulation was at the time.

Fast-forward 3 years and I am now reviewing all documents that my attorney gave me to me hours before the trial (bench trial at the attorneys suggestion) (police interviews- where there are interrogations telling the police that the web chats, phone devices are being answered by a blacked out name party), I also see now and can access the notice of expert and notice of evidence (which I$ didn't know existed at trial or prior to trial) I compared that to the trial transcript and noticed that the WhatsApp phone numbers are different than the government 2 exhibit. At trial, the government never mentioned the device phone number only the phone numbers associated with the WhatsApp web chat. Which is why I would assume the district court was also thrown off.

None of this was brought up in appeal, and I've hired and spent over 100k in attorney fees and they all want to do one of 2 things: Eithrr There was not sufficient evidence or inneffective assistance of counsel. No attorney reads into the case or looks for these things. Seems like standard answer.

I've filed a pro Se motion for a new trial explaining the discrepancy in the governments evidence, notice of expert testimony versus the actual testimony. The government hid the true ownership of the device submitted at trial and tricked the court by only mentioning the WhatsApp chat phone numbers and not the device that it was extracted from.

The district court asked for the government to respond by August 1st. The governmet never responded, I assume because they would put their foot in their mouth.

But no attorney has ever spoken to me about a motion for new trial on newly discovered evidence, I had to figure this out myself..

Which has brought me to this forum seeking advice on why something that has the potential to correct a wrong after trial, after an appeal and before a 2255 is not advisable.

 

[quincy]

You originally said that the defendant didn’t have an attorney.

… Defendant has ever been ale to afford an attorney and proceeded pro Se more than likely what made such devious practice easy to proceed with. …

And here, several posts later, you say:

… I did have an attorney, I explained the dicrpencies and he should call a WhatsApp expert, I explained that it was a web chat and it is not the same as a cellphone text. Meaning that anyone could impersonate or spoof a phone number.

The attorney said he didn't understand what I was telling him and agreed to stipulate the whatapp chat. I didn't know what stipulation was at the time.

Fast-forward 3 years and I am now reviewing all documents that my attorney gave me to me hours before the trial (bench trial at the attorneys suggestion) (police interviews- where there are interrogations telling the police that the web chats, phone devices are being answered by a blacked out name party), I also see now and can access the notice of expert and notice of evidence (which I$ didn't know existed at trial or prior to trial) I compared that to the trial transcript and noticed that the WhatsApp phone numbers are different than the government 2 exhibit. At trial, the government never mentioned the device phone number only the phone numbers associated with the WhatsApp web chat. Which is why I would assume the district court was also thrown off.

None of this was brought up in appeal, and I've hired and spent over 100k in attorney fees and they all want to do one of 2 things: Eithrr There was not sufficient evidence or inneffective assistance of counsel. No attorney reads into the case or looks for these things. Seems like standard answer.

I've filed a pro Se motion for a new trial explaining the discrepancy in the governments evidence, notice of expert testimony versus the actual testimony. The government hid the true ownership of the device submitted at trial and tricked the court by only mentioning the WhatsApp chat phone numbers and not the device that it was extracted from.

The district court asked for the government to respond by August 1st. The governmet never responded, I assume because they would put their foot in their mouth.

But no attorney has ever spoken to me about a motion for new trial on newly discovered evidence, I had to figure this out myself..

Which has brought me to this forum seeking advice on why something that has the potential to correct a wrong after trial, after an appeal and before a 2255 is not advisable.

Thank you for letting us know you were the defendant in this case. If you feel that your attorney did not represent you properly, affecting the outcome of the case, then you have options.

 

[FreeMauMau]

You originally said that the defendant didn’t have an attorney.

And here, several posts later, you say:

Thank you for letting us know you were the defendant in this case. If you feel that your attorney did not represent you properly, affecting the outcome of the case, then you have options.

I never said I did not have an attorney at trial, sentencing or appeal. I filed a Pro Se motion for a new trial based on the phone device not matching up with the WhatsApp chats.

Something that any reasonable attorney should have questioned. But I had 3 paid attorneys at every stage and they have never looked into it even after I bring it up. They never bring it up again.

How am I suppose to use the options you mention of the same attorneys hide those options from me.

Again, I filed amotion for new trial Pro Se and is moving. This is something that no attorney or even you told me was possible, 33 months after the trial ended.

The attorney I speak of give the same two standard options that seems you will also advice on "inneffective assistance of counsel" and "there was not enough evidence". Which to me is all gimmick.

 

[quincy]

I never said I did not have an attorney at trial, sentencing or appeal. I filed a Pro Se motion for a new trial based on the phone device not matching up with the WhatsApp chats.

Something that any reasonable attorney should have questioned. But I had 3 paid attorneys at every stage and they have never looked into it even after I bring it up. They never bring it up again.

How am I suppose to use the options you mention of the same attorneys hide those options from me.

Again, I filed amotion for new trial Pro Se and is moving. This is something that no attorney or even you told me was possible, 33 months after the trial ended.

The attorney I speak of give the same two standard options that seems you will also advice on "inneffective assistance of counsel" and "there was not enough evidence". Which to me is all gimmick.

It is not a “gimmick” to report an attorney to the State Bar for failing to represent you properly or to use “ineffective assistance of counsel” as grounds for a new trial.

The problem now arises, however, that you say you had THREE paid attorneys - and it stretches credulity that all three failed to represent you properly. It seems far more likely that the evidence you now question and find lacking was simply not enough to change the outcome of the trial. Prosecutors apparently had evidence enough to support the conviction.

For what were you charged and convicted? What was your sentence?

 

[Just Blue]

It is not a “gimmick” to report an attorney to the State Bar for failing to represent you properly or to use “ineffective assistance of counsel” as grounds for a new trial.

The problem now arises, however, that you say you had THREE paid attorneys - and it stretches credulity that all three failed to represent you properly. It seems far more likely that the evidence you now question and find lacking was simply not enough to change the outcome of the trial. Prosecutors apparently had evidence enough to support the conviction.

For what were you charged and convicted? What was your sentence?

Oh, joy! We probably get to wait another 3 pages for an answer again!