Thursday, January 09, 2014

Defense is requesting a gag order in the Bullock case. UPDATED

John Chiv/Words Worth

That's unfortunate.

Ruling on motions in Bullock case-Bail denied - John Chiv/Words Worth

Both motions granted. Hon. Judge Dale Reinholtsen presided over the hearing today. The motion for the gag order was tentatively granted but is reset to be heard before Judge John Feeney on January 15 to define the parameters of the order.

County Counsel was present at the hearing regarding the protective order on publicity. County Counsel wanted clarification on the protective order and their concern was how that would limit the County's ability to respond to public record requests. Judge Reinholtsen had considered how the gag order would affect media so in order to research and make an informed ruling regarding the County (The County just showed up for this hearing after being served the order by defense) Reinholtsen "tenatively" granted the order. The final ruling is expected when Judge Feeney hears the case next week.

Regarding the motion to increase bail or deny bail, Judge Reinholtsen denied bail... More at the link.

Bullock held without bail, defense granted gag order - KIEM-TV Channel 3

Deputy District Attorney, Elan Firpo, filed a motion and asked that Gary Lee Bullock, 44 be held at no bail. On Monday Bullock’s bail was set at $1.2 million at his arraignment. Bullock has been at the Humboldt County Jail since Jan. 2, after his stepfather turned him into authorities. Bullock is accused of killing St. Bernard Catholic Church Priest Eric Freed with a wooden stake and metal pipe after breaking through a window to Freed’s home on New Year’s Day.

11 comments:

  1. Too late for the Gag Order, the Times-Standard already declared him guilty.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There will be a motion for change of venue, unless the defense is throwing in the towel, and it will be granted, unless the judge wants the case reversed. The case has been the sole topic of conversation county wide, the prosecution has released information about how the killing was committed and how the defendant tried to cover it up, the issue of violence and crime is a hot button all over the county. An early gag order might have worked, but the cat is well and truly out of the bag and is not going back in. So, where will it be? Wade tried one in Napa, Fleming tried one in Sacramento (actually two, that was a double jury case if memory serves) Del Norte and Trinity are too close .....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Joe fortunately your opinion is just that and not the final decision or solution. As for anonymous, I would guess you are probably a lawyer or somehow related to the field. Again like Joe Blowhard your ego is immense.

    The case received international coverage. He can get an unbiased jury here just as he can anywhere else. The details released were cautious and no different from any other high profile murder case.

    Those blaming anyone other than the suspect who was captured on video, his family, the drug culture that leads to a lack of numbness to anyone and anything other one's own selfish needs has an agenda of wanting this case to be swept under the rug.

    This case is about a human being and other victims of senseless violent crime that pervades Humboldt County and the solution is not blog posts but an attitude of personal responsibility and a community that does not enable criminals.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Done a lot of venue motions, have you? A lot of "high profile" cases? This case has aleready gotten quite a bit more publicity than others which were moved out of county. And the extent of the publicity emphasizes the need for a change of venue, especially when measured against the relatively small jury pool here. The more media that has covered it, the less likely that anyone here missed it. The DA's office should have gagged (oooh, good one) themselves early on, and sealed the record. Oopsy.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't know - but I think he should have to stand trial in the community that was harmed.

    And - like anything else - he's entitled to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

    The gag order is a bad idea though.

    And why does every article say 'the parents' - yet never names them...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rose, you are right, Humboldt has a strong interest in having the case here. And if it wasn't amateur hour, again, in the D.A.'s office, basic steps could have been taken to strengthen the argument against change of venue. Seal affidavits, decline comment, insist that the facts come out in court, eschew gratuitous press ... but that did not happen. The defense is ethically obligated to file the motion, and it might be denied (read, automatic appellate issue) where the smart, but distasteful move in the long run is to concede the issue. This issue could and should have been anticipated and handled.
    Amateurs, learners, publicity hounds, the losers here are the people of Humboldt. Again.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I do agree, 7:58, to some extent. But. It is absolutely normal to discuss the events, though, and it is much better for people to be informed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous at 6:34 your condescending attitude and overblown ego isn't worth addressing. I agree with Rose that this is the community affected. As for those dragging in the present DA's office and attacking who is prosecuting, you show yourself and out yourself as someone wanting to discredit certain people with no real interest in the case.

    Fortunately not all lawyers and humans are like you 6:34. If you are such a gift and so knowledgeable about the law you should be busy working instead of trolling the internet and spare the rest of us your haughty attitude.

    ReplyDelete
  9. So, 9:28, not really up to addressing the venue issue, are we? Invective rather than analysis? Not comfortable when citizens note the professional shortcomings of public agencies?
    Not at all comfortable with attitudes and viewpoints different from one's own, and all too ready to tell others what to do with themselves.
    Let me get my DSM out, see what fits.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous at 8:37 all you want is attention. While you have your DSM out look up projection.

    One does not need to have a degree to see that you are a frustrated, insecure individual with too much time on your hand. You have hijacked at least 2 posts and want to keep the topic going because the internet is what you live for.

    As I said on another thread, debating trolls on the internet is a waste of time.

    You have used up your quota of narcissism for the day.

    ReplyDelete
  11. So, still nothing on the venue issue. Buehler, Buehler, venue? Hello?

    Ok then, trolling condescending overblown narcissist (did I leave out any of your well-reasoned analysis?) one, DA's office fan club, zero, Humboldt County loses again.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.