MEL GIBSON’S EX BACKED OUT OF $15 M SETTLEMENT REACHED AT PRIVATE MEDIATION

TMZ is reporting a big number that his been mentioned in several prior news reports: Fifteen Million Dollars.

That is the financial package that the ex’s politically connected former attorney, civil trial lawyer Eric M. George, won for his client at a private mediation earlier this year.

The ex—and Gibson—signed a written, confidential settlement agreement at that time, but for reasons assumed to boil down to greed, the ex reneged on the agreement, hired her present family law attorney, and leaked the audio tapes to Radar online through a third party now believed to be her sister.

Gibson’s lawyers scoff at the idea that the ex backed out of the settlement because it called for unsupervised visitation between Gibson and his child—because since the date of the alleged “assault” until she leaked the tapes he had been encouraging Gibson to spend as much time with the child as possible--and he did.

In addition, her family law attorney said in court this week that the settlement agreement was “irrelevant” because she was represented by George, and not a family law attorney, when she agreed (in writing) to the $15 million settlement package that included visitation rights for Gibson.

It is hard to imagine the ex’s current attorney thinking that she could even come close to a settlement of that magnitude now, since all that she will be entitled to in family court is monthly child support—provided that she is awarded custody of the child.

Clearly, the tapes (or more precisely the promise to keep them confidential)—which were previewed at the mediation—played a major role in Gibson’s agreement to pay the Russian scam artist fifteen million dollars, but now that the tapes have been played on every cable TV station in the world 24/7 for two weeks, her leverage has evaporated.

In other words, the Russian’s threat to sue Gibson for assault, battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress if the case did not settle in mediation was a way of negotiating a financial settlement in exchange for the tapes never seeing the light of day without calling it extortion. But now that the tapes are out there, what more can she do to Gibson?

The Russian had her moment of maximum leverage when, through attorney #1, she negotiated a $15M windfall, and through greed she flushed it down the toilet.

We hope her sister got a lot of money from Radar online for those tampered with tapes. Because that is all the grifter is ever going to see over and above monthly child support.

SOURCE: GIBSON’S EX’S SISTER GAVE RANT TAPES TO RADAR ONLINE

It was a big day in court for Mel Gibson.

Even though neither he nor his legally challenged Russian ex girlfriend were present, their attorneys were in a two hour closed court session with the judge today.

Word has leaked to the Hollywood Reporter following the hearing, though, that a new suspect has emerged in the mystery of who handed over the faked Gibson audio tapes to Radar online: The ex girlfriends sister:

“Several sources confirm that Oksana Grigorieva's younger sister, Natalie, is suspected of having leaked the audio tapes to the online website and is currently being looked at by authorities.

"I suspect that if the authorities look at the sister, they'll find a wire transfer or a check to her from the website," alleges a source close to the case. "She and Oksana are very close."

“Another source close to the case also claims that Oksana's sister was involved in first shopping the audio tapes to various media outlets before finally making the sale to Radar.

"All the tabloids said no to the deal because they were asked to purchase the audio tapes before hearing them," says another source close to the case.

“If Oksana's sister is found to have brokered the deal at the behest of her sister, it's possible that the judge could find the Russian singer in contempt of court. Grigorieva could also be facing possible extortion charges as well based on a text and emails that she sent Gibson.

“In the text message, reported exclusively by THR on Wednesday, Grigorieva wrote Gibson that the reason she recorded him was because "you broke your agreement with me."

“Grigorieva on Thursday claimed that the only reason she balked at signing the long form settlement agreement when it was placed in front of her was because it gave Gibson unsupervised visits with their child.

"The statement is completely false. This never happened," counters a source close to the case, adding, "This is the third explanation that she's offered for why she backed out of the agreement."

We always assumed that—regardless of whether it was her attorney or someone else that shopped the tapes to Radar online—it was done at the behest of Gibson’s ex.

We are relieved to lean that it was not the ex’s attorney after all. Although well regarded in his profession (Southern California divorce lawyers), the man is somewhere north of 80 years old.

While the ex may have believed that releasing the tapes to the media, in addition to generating some short term cash, might tactically benefit her by putting pressure on Mel Gibson to pay her millions to shut her up, it had just the opposite effect.

By going nuclear on Gibson she has at once emptied her arsenal of ammunition and taken away all incentive for Gibson to pay her anything at all except court order child support (assuming that when the smoke clears she will even have custody of their child and not be behind bars for the illegal taping and attempted extortion of the action star).

Now what damage the ex was capable of doing has been done, and Mel Gibson will only benefit by definitively proving in court that the Russian faked her voice on the heavily edited audio tapes, and that as mercurial and abusive as Gibson comes across on the tapes a. he was goaded into losing his cool and b. Gibson never laid a hand on her.

Stay tuned folks. Because while some of the talking heads on cable television may still be buying the Russian grafter’s shtick, there are far too many holes and fabrications in her so called “evidence”, and this is not going to be quite the ending that ex had in mind. We are quite sure of that.

GIBSON EX NOW TARGET OF EXTORTION INVESTIGATION, LA COUNTY SHERIFF SAYS

The Ukrainian woman who by “coincidence” only gets pregnant by rich celebrities, notwithstanding her sperm rich past

Although this story comes from TMZ.com, since the source is a named spokesperson for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department speaking for attribution it is probably very reliable.

[UPDATE: The AP has now picked up this story since we posted.]

The bottom line is that Los Angeles law enforcement is now actively investigating Mel Gibson’s charges, made through his attorney Blair Berk (a partner with famed criminal lawyer Barry Tarlow in Tarlow & Berk) in a presentation yesterday, that his ex girlfriend committed the crime of extortion by threatening to go public with the now infamous rant tapes unless the actor paid her millions.

According to Mel’s camp, a deal was even agreed to in principle and written up whereby the ex was to receive $15,000,000—but she got greedy and refused to sign on the dotted line.

Says Sheriff Department spokesperson Steve Whitmore to TMZ: “Extortion allegations have been brought to our attention and we are certainly going to be looking at that."

Those of you that think that a criminal or civil (brought by Mel for every "hryvnia" the scam artist has stuffed into the mattress) extortion charge (known colloquially as “blackmail”) is far fetched should read our prior coverage of the attorney and client who tried to shakedown Michael Flatley with a rape allegation. A subsequent civil suit for extortion resulted in an $11 million dollar judgment in the Lord of the Dance star’s favor.

Extortion is committed whenever a person asks for money or other financial benefits under an express or implied threat of going public with reputation damaging information—even if the information is true.

And then there is the thee years in a woman’s prison (sorry Comrade, no Crystal there) the fecund scamstress is facing for secretly recording Gibson in violation of Penal Code Section 632. As in 3 years in the joint for EACH illegal recording.

Bye, bye baby, bye bye.

UPDATE: The MSM now has this story: Sheriff investigating Gibson's ex for extortion (AP)

GIBSON’S EX’S VOICE ADDED TO RANT TAPES LATER, EXPERTS SAY

In view of her long history of running the pregnancy con on wealthy celebrities, we have been warning our readers to view any evidence proffered by Gibson’s ex (we refuse to print her name) with a great skepticism.

In addition to the fact that the photos that the Russian scam artist took the day Gibson allegedly hit her in the mouth hard enough to break two teeth show no facial or lip cuts, bruising, or swelling, it now appears conclusive that the audio tapes that the ex leaked to Radar on-line were phonied up, using tapes that the Russian con artist secretly made of Gibson from the beginning (before he even left his wife) that were remixed and dubbed using a voice track for the ex that was recently recorded using a professional microphone. Therefore, for example, what appear to be admissions on the tapes by Gibson following accusations by the ex, may be taken completely out of context and may not be admissions at all.

Nor is whatever provoked the outbursts from Gibson on the tapes accurately portrayed. The entire context appears to have been faked.

There is no denying by the audio experts that it is Mel Gibson's voice on the tapes. They say that the tapes have been spliced and put together using a professional microphone and recording techniques.

In addition, in one tape released by the ex to Radar on-line, Gibson appears to be referring to something that sounds as if he was still living with his wife, which would bring that phone call back to the beginning of their relationship.

She apparently faked teeth damage by Gibson, and faked the audio tapes—all in connection with her demand for millions from Gibson to make it all go away.

That that is after scamming the star in to falling for her and getting her pregnant. (just like she did with James Bond star Timothy Dalton in London).

Nice lady.

MEL GIBSON EX FABRICATED ASSAULT IN $10M EXTORTION ATTEMPT, HER OWN DENTIST SAYS, OTHER EXPERTS CONFIRM

Don’t worry baby, I’m on the pill….

No surprises here—given her scam-artist past, but it now appears that Mel Gibson’s ex was NOT punched in the mouth (either "twice" or at all) as is alleged by the Russian “singer” (whose CD, produced by Gibson, sold 200 copies); the alleged Gibson "one-two" punch that damaged the veneers on two front teeth never happened. And even the Ukrainian grafter’s own dentist says so.

Here is the story from the Huffington Post—who was one of Gibson’s early detractors—a true sign that the worm has turned:

"Sources connected to [the ex’s] dentist say he believes the photo is doctored.

"The sources quote Dr. Ross Shelden as saying, "The nose is not hers. The lips are not right. It's not a true and accurate picture. It has definitely been altered."

"PREVIOUSLY: Radar has released a photo of Mel Gibson's ex, [name redacted], after she says he punched her twice in the mouth, knocking out her teeth and giving her a concussion.

"[She] lost a veneer and the right front tooth was severely chipped," a source familiar with the investigation told Radar.

“[Her] teeth were not damaged. Her dentist submitted a sworn declaration that one veneer was knocked out and the other was damaged. Experts who have analyzed the photos believe the injury is inconsistent with being punched in the mouth since there is no soft tissue damage--and it may have been self-inflicted.

“There is "no evidence of external or internal damage," a law enforcement source [said] "Sources also [said that the ex] tried to extort Mel out of more than $10 million in return for keeping the tapes of his explosive, racist rant private, and there are emails to prove it.”

We hate to say “I told you so” but we will anyway. BTW, before you judge Mel, please keep in mind that not only did he leave his wife for this--scam artist --he paid his first wife hundreds of millions of dollars in the divorce.

ARE THE MEL GIBSON TAPES ADMISSIBLE IN COURT?

The lovely couple

Legal Analysis

By Blogonaut


One cannot turn on the television without being bombarded with outtakes from audio recordings of Mel Gibson’s ex calmly pushing his buttons as she secretly records his diatribes. What can we say, the bitch is evil, and he is nuts.

But are the tapes admissible in court?

At least one other blog has tried to definitively answer that question and failed miserably. But since we have our own “legal expert” (moi), before you finish reading this post you will know the answer.

The stakes are high for what’s-her-name, the Russian that Gibson now calls the “Goldigger”, because if there is no applicable statutory exception, each time Gibson’s money loving ex-GF recorded the actor that Hollywood loves to hate, she committed a violation of California Penal Code Section 632—which is punishable by a jail term of 12 months OR 16 months, two years, or three years in state prison (that’s for each recording).

So let’s get to the exceptions.

Yes, there are several very specific and very limited exceptions to the criminal statute, that are limited by the conjunctive requirements of intent, subject matter, and scope:

The recording must be made for the purpose of gathering evidence that the person reasonably believes relates to the commission of the crimes of:

1. Extortion;

2. Kidnapping;

3. Bribery;

4. Any crime involving violence against the person;

5. Harassing telephone calls.

There are two categories that are arguably applicable.

The first is #4—any crime involving violence against the person.

But remember, the Implanted One must not only actually believe that the scope of the recorded conversation is limited to evidence that Mel Gibson hit her, that belief must be reasonable. So next time that you visit Radar.com to give a listen to Ms. Boobs calmly baiting Mad Mel into a rage ask yourself—is this conversation reasonably related to incidents wherein the most hated man in Hollywood hit the Russian temptress? Or is she just pushing Mel’s buttons in aid of getting him to yell, scream, and use abusive language so she can damage the actor-producer in the tabloid media?

We think it is quite obviously the later.

But wait; there is another potentially applicable exception: #5—gathering evidence of harassing phone calls.

If the Implanted One can establish a prior pattern of Mad Mel calling her residence at all hours of the night and day making harassing phone calls, then all recordings that she made over the phone after that harassment commenced are fair game.

Additionally, one must ask, was the required purpose of the recordings--to gather evidence of on of the specified crimes--the purpose for which the recordings were made? Remember, in addition to the other requirements, the purpose of the recordings must be to gather evidence of one of the enumerated crimes--and no other.

Of course, the best evidence of Miss Boob’s intent is: What subsequent use did she make of the tapes?

Did she immediately turn the tapes over to law enforcement to aid in a prosecution for domestic battery and/or harassing phone calls?

Or did she instead give the recordings to a tabloid publication in aid of damaging what is left of Mad Mel’s reputation?

We all know the answer to that question, don’t we. The answer is clear even if you hate Mel Gibson.

The Implanted One did not give the tapes to police at all, she sent the tapes to Radar on-line to embarrass the actor and to cause as much damage to him in the public eye as possible.

Therefore, in our opinion, no exception applies, our Russian Beauty does not pass go, and she is guilty of multiple violations of Penal Code Section 632.

In addition, by the express terms of Penal Code Section 632, the tapes are not admissible in any prosecution against the actor for domestic violence (not that the tapes would be necessary to prove that all his ex wants for Christmas is two front teeth—and why).

The only question is will the Los Angeles District Attorney have the guts, in an election year when he is running for California Attorney General, to charge a domestic violence victim with illegally taping her abuser? Because the Implanted One would bear the burden of proving in any Section 632 prosecution that her intent was evidence gathering as specified, and that she cannot do--no way.

In our opinion both parties could use some time in jail. And then we can all go back to watching the BP underwater webcam.

WHEN CLOWNS GO BAD: CLOWN ARRESTED FOR STEP-DAUGHTER’S RAPE

How could the life of a young woman afflicted with both schizophrenia and epilepsy possibly get any worse?

If you guessed being raped by a clown you would be correct.

Is there no limit to the depravity of these clowns?

Juárez clown arrested on suspicion of raping stepdaughter (El Paso Times)

TATTERED COUTURE IMPROBABLE INSPIRATION FOR HAUNTING LEONARD COHEN BALLAD

We found this spellbinding performance on a Spanish language website. Not being familiar with the Montréal Poet-Songwriter-Performer’s work post cir. 1976, and sharing the artist’s connection with Hydra, Greece (having courted the love of our life there), we clicked play and learned what all the fuss was about.

Bravo, Burberry, for providing the improbable inspiración for this work of arte.

Bravo harmónica guy (amazing).

Bravo whispering poet.

You cannot sing exactly, but you can write, and you can perform. And you can haunt the soul.

LOS ANGELES PROSECUTORS MISLEAD LA COURT IN POLANSKI CASE, LETTER FROM SWISS GOVERNMENT SHOWS

More misconduct in Polanski case caused Swiss to deny extradition

July 15, 2010
By Blogonaut

SEE BOMBSHELL UPDATE (DOJ THROWS LA PROSECUTORS UNDER THE BUS)--SCROLL DOWN.

According to an Associated Press story today, the Swiss Justice Ministry has released a letter asserting in effect that Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza (who refused to release the sealed transcripts that would have shown whether or not Polanski had already served his agreed sentence) was mislead by Los Angeles prosecutors when they told the court on in papers on May 6, 2010 and later at a May 10, 2010 hearing that the Swiss never requested the transcripts.

Judge Espinoza cited the lack of any request by the Swiss for the information as a reason for refusing to make the sealed testimony of a former Los Angeles prosecutor familiar with what went on in with the case 1978 available for the extradition proceeding.

In reality, the Swiss had already made that formal written request to the United States Department of Justice on May 5, 2010, and the Swiss were told on May 13, 2010 that the rquest would not be honored.

Los Angeles prosecutors now claim that Justice Department officials never informed them of the request—so the right hand did not know what the left hand was doing when they (unknowingly, they say) mislead the court.

Regardless of whether the Justice Department concealed that critical information from Los Angeles prosecutors or whether prosecutors simply lied to the court to keep their 33 year old dirty laundry under seal, let's not be too quick to condemn the Swiss—who said all along that they would not extradite Polanski to the United States unless it could be shown that the director had not already served the sentence that he agreed to in the plea bargain with the court and prosecutors.


Read More: In letter, Swiss cite key reason for refusal to extradite Polanski (Linda Deutsch-AP)

UPDATE (7/15/2010):

It now appears that the Los Angeles prosecutors deliberately mislead Judge Peter Espinoza—who was told in prosecution filings on May 6, 2010 and at a May 10, 2010 hearing that the Swiss had not requested the release of the sealed transcripts, and who based his denial of Polanski’s request that those transcripts be made available to the Swiss in connection with the pending extradition matter.

An AP story filed two hours ago, the Justice Department said today that the Los Angeles district attorney's Office approved the denial of a Swiss request for information in the Roman Polanski case.

The Justice Department said that it kept the district attorney's office fully informed of all requests from Swiss authorities regarding the effort to have Polanski extradited to the United States.

The department said the DA's office provided input and "approved all responses from the U.S. government to Swiss authorities on this matter," including one rejecting a request to turn over sealed testimony that proved pivotal in Switzerland's decision to free Polanski.

"The Department of Justice and the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office worked in close coordination on this important extradition request," Justice Department spokeswoman Laura Sweeney said in an e-email.

It would very much appear at this point that the Justice Department is throwing Los Angeles prosecutors under the bus by providing evidence that prosecutors deliberately mislead the court to keep its 33 year old dirty laundry under seal.

Wow!

We would not want to be the prosecutor who represented to the court that the Swiss never asked for the transcripts—when in fact they had.

Read more: Justice Dept: LA DA kept informed in Polanski case (AP)

POLANSKI A FREE MAN—MORE REACTION

A not unhappy Roman Polanski is freed by Swiss court


Opinion
By Richard Cohen
(For the Washington Post)

The Swiss got it right. Their refusal to extradite film director Roman Polanski to the United States on a 33-year-old sex charge is the proper dénouement for this mess of a case. There is no doubt that Polanski did what he did, which is have sex with a 13-year-old after plying her with booze. There is no doubt also that after all these years there is something stale about the case, not to mention a “victim,” Samantha Geimer, who has long ago forgiven her assailant and dearly wishes the whole thing would go away. So do I.

There are only bad reasons to proceed with the prosecution. The first is to rebut the argument that some sort of legal or moral exception ought to be made for Polanski on account of his talent. Having just seen his film “The Pianist” for the second time, I salute his genius as, if I knew something about poetry, I might that of Ezra Pound.

Pound was both a traitor and an anti-Semite, but he was anyway awarded the Bollingen Prize by the Library of Congress for his “Pisan Cantos,” written as it happens soon after World War II, while US authorities had him imprisoned in Italy. He was finally incarcerated as an incompetent in St. Elizabeths Hospital, where he continued to write, while all sorts of other incompetents -- famous intellectuals -- continued to debate his worthiness. Into this controversy stepped the clear-headed art critic Clement Greenberg:

“I am sick of the… silliness which condones almost any moral or intellectual failing on the artist’s part as long as he is or seems a successful artist. It is still justifiable to demand that he be a successful human being before anything else, even at the cost of his art.” It seems pretty clear that, at least back in 1977, Polanski was not a successful human being.

It does not matter to me either that Polanski is a Holocaust survivor; not, even, that his wife Sharon Tate -- pregnant at the time -- was murdered in 1969 by Charles Manson and his so-called “Family.” Lots of people survived the Holocaust and other tragedies, and few of them committed crimes.

The only argument in favor of Polanski’s continued freedom is that he is the victim of judicial misconduct. He had good reason to believe that the trial judge in his case was going to break the plea agreement and throw the book at him. He had already pleaded guilty to a reduced charge; he had already spent 42 days in Chino State Prison under psychiatric examination. (Another analogy to the Pound case -- a talented person must be nuts to do something so wrong.) He ran from the prospect of a judge who was going to make his reputation at Polanski’s expense and send him to jail for a very long time. I would have done the same.

It was this alleged -- but virtually proven -- miscarriage of justice that impressed the Swiss authorities and why they rejected the American requests for extradition. That was good. It would have been better, though, if at the same time they denounced the many artists and intellectuals who haughtily dismissed what Polanski had done on the basis of his talent and achievements. They thought of his films; they should have thought of their own daughters.


Read this editorial on the Washington Post site

UPDATE: Polanski only safe in France, Poland, Switzerland (AP)

"Oh darn! If only I would have known I could only travel (free as a bird) between my lux villa in Gstaad, the delights of Paris, the delights of Paris, Carla, the Cannes Film Festival, Tahiti, and all of France, Switzerland, and Poland, I would have preferred to rot in a California prison!"

--Roman Polanski


Samantha Geimer re: Roman Polanski: “Enough Is Enough”

SPECTOR MURDER APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL EXTENDS DUE DATE FOR PROSECUTION BRIEF

Phillip Spector appellate counsel Dennis P. Riordan appears to consult a higher authority (Spector seated to Riordan’s right)

The California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District in Los Angeles today granted the request of the California Attorney General for more time to oppose music producer Phil Spector’s appeal from his 2009 conviction and life sentence arising out of the producer’s alleged second degree murder of failed actress-turned-cocktail hostess Lana Clarkson.

The attorney General represents the People of the State of California in most felony appeals arising out of the California Superior Court.

The new due date for the AG brief is August 9, 2010.

Further extensions in the briefing schedule are anticipated in light of the length of the trials (in each instance six months) and the substantial, multiple issues raised by Spector in his Opening Brief on Appeal.

Stay tuned here for the latest legal developments and legal analysis.

ROMAN POLANSKI A FREE MAN—SWISS DENY US EXTRADITION

Roman Polanski waives goodbye to US criminal charges

****Breaking News****

By Blogonaut

Swiss authorities have rejected the pending request to extradite the award winning director Roman Polanski to Los Angeles, California to face sentencing on a 33 year old statutory rape case there involving the alleged sexual intercourse with a minor who has since opposed any further punishment for the director. (See our prior coverage, here--scroll down.)

Swiss authorities had little comment when thy announced that Polanski was released from house arrest and free to return to his native France:

"The reason for the decision lies in the fact that it was not possible to exclude with the necessary certainty a fault in the US extradition request, although the issue was thoroughly examined. Moreover, also the principles of State action deriving from international public order were taken into account."

Translation: We have had enough of the United States dictating to the Swiss. Earlier this year the Swiss caved under tremendous pressure from the United States Department of State and US Justice Department to violate Swiss law and release the names of 4,000 US suspected tax evaders with numbered accounts in Swiss Bank UBS. In addition, Los Angeles prosecutors refused to unseal and provide to the Swiss certain testimony from former members of the Office of the District Attorney for Los Angeles County calling into question the integrity of the process leading to Polanski's fugitive status.

In our opinion, the Swiss finally said: “enough is enough”.

READ MORE: Roman Polanski's victim wants case to finally end (latimes.com)

MEHSERLE VERDICT: INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER (WHAT WE THINK)

There is not much to say here, except the following:

1. We predicted this verdict, and think it was a fair one for the reasons stated in our prior post (scroll down to the comments).

2. We do not believe that Mehserle intended to shoot the victim, but we cannot have police officers running around who react to stress by grabbing a gun instead of a taser either—which is criminal negligence.

3. We do not believe that this case was ever about race and there is no evidence to the contrary--including any prior racial animus on Mehserle's part.

That is all.

Disagree? Join in the discussion.

AS MEHSERLE JURY DELIBERATES, SWISS TO ANNOUNCE POLANSKI EXTRADITION DECISION

This could be a big week for legal news junkies. The Mehserle verdict is not the only legal shoe that is about to drop.

As first reported by swissinfo.ch, a Swiss official has told the news agency that a decision on whether to grant the request of Los Angeles prosecutors (made through the State Department) to extradite Roman Polanski to face sentencing on his 32 year old statutory rape conviction has already been made, and will be announced shortly.

However, even if the Swiss—who are still smarting from political pressure that resulted in one of its major banks (UBS) violating Swiss secrecy laws by divulging the names of 4,000 tax cheats to the IRS—cave yet again to American pressure, don’t expect the director to be boarding the next Swiss Air flight to Los Angeles. Polanski will have the right to appeal the decision.

As reported by the Main Justice blog, The director is represented by Steptoe & Johnson’s Reid Weingarten, a well-known criminal defense lawyer and close friend of Attorney General Eric Holder.

In the meantime, Polanski is confined to his chalet and grounds in uber exclusive Gstaad—a fate not worse than death, unless you are allergic to fine wine, the best food, the company of royalty and the mountain air. (See our prior Polanski coverage, here--SCROLL DOWN.)

MISTRIAL POSSIBLE IN MEHSERLE TRIAL AS MORE JURORS EXCUSED

Deliberations begin anew as alternate juror pool shrinks

July 7, 210
By Blogonaut

UDATED AT 1:38 PM (Scroll down)

The jury in the Johannes Mehserle murder trial will start deliberations all over today with an alternate juror in place after one juror called in sick (but is expected to return today) and another leaves for vacation.

The vacation was anticipated, but the illness delayed deliberations until today when the sick juror is expected to return to court. As a result, the jury failed to deliberate yesterday as originally planned by the court.

In addition, because the vacationing juror has been replaced with an alternate, by law the judge must instruct the jury this morning to start their deliberations over.

But a new potential problem looms for a verdict in this case should deliberations drag on: There are only two alternate jurors left who can replace jurors who are excused from the jury due to illness or other reasons. Therefore, if three more jurors are excused from the jury, the court would be required to declare a mistrial unless the defense agrees to proceed with 11 jurors instead of the twelve mandated by the California Constitution.

The former BART officer is on trial for shooting Oscar Grant III to death on New Year's Eve 2009 at the Fruitvale BART station. Mehserle doesn't deny shooting Grant, but he says he meant to tase Grant, not shoot him, as Grant lay face down on the ground.

The jury has four possible verdicts:

1. Not guilty;

2. Second-degree murder (intentional killing with malice but without premeditation);

3. Voluntary manslaughter (“imperfect self defense” i.e. an unreasonable but honest belief by Mehserle that his life was in danger);

4. Involuntary manslaughter (the officer killed Grant out of criminal negligence).

It seems to us that the fourth option is the most likely outcome, given Mehserle’s expression of surprise captured on video when he shot Grant as well as his apparent negligence in mistaking his taser for his service weapon, his lack of motive, and the former officer’s emotionality on the witness stand, but anything is possible in a jury trial—including no verdict at all.

If 12 jurors are unable to unanimously agree on a verdict or more than two additional jurors are excused from the jury, a mistrial will be declared, and the entire case would have to be repeated in front of a new jury.

UPDATE: The jury is now composed of four white females, three white males, three Hispanic women, one Asian-American woman and one male who declined to state ethnicity.

READ MORE: Mehserle trial jury to only deliberate for two hours today due to juror's doctor's appointment (SJ Mercury News)

FURTHER UPDATE: Following juror's question about "provocation" deliberations end for the day.

READ MORE: Deliberations end for day in transit shooting case (kcba.com)

HAPPY 4TH OF JULY WEEKEND EVERYONE! BLOGONAUT WILL RETURN NEXT WEEK

COP VS JUDGE DUSTUP MOVES FROM PARKING LOT TO COURT

The Shreveport Times

A 2009 courthouse parking lot scuffle between a police officer and a sitting judge—after the judge was stopped for not wearing his seatbelt—has now spilled into the Red River district court with dueling lawsuits.

Coushatta, Louisiana is a small community, but even so on June 29, 2009, there were two local residents who had not yet made each other's acquaintance: Trooper Eric Schonfarber and District Judge Lewis O. Sams—whom Schonfarger pulled over for not wearing his seatbelt.

The judge admitted he was not wearing his seatbelt and asked that the trouper write him the ticket so he could be on his way. But when the officer asked the judge where he worked, he then demanded to see His Honor’s judicial badge—which the judge declined to show the trouper.

At this point the respective narratives of cop and judge wildly diverge.

Trouper Schonfarber claimed that the judge was out of control and had to be restrained. Judge Sams asserted that Schonfarber threatened him with a taser pressed up against his chest. Both agree that the cop-on-judge confrontation became physical.

Things escalated from there, with Schonfarber being charged with assault and facing administrative discipline in his own department. (The state attorney general later dismissed all criminal charges at Judge Sams’s request.)

Now, 12 months later, it is apparent that time does NOT heal all wounds.

In the apparent hope that state trouper and judge would each let the other’s respective one-year statute of limitations to sue expire, they have now sued each other on the last day to do.

The judge has sued for assault, and the trouper for damage to his reputation—alleging that Sams conspired with a former state representative, Taylor Townsend, and at least one "high-ranking state police official at Troop G in Bossier" to cast him in "unfavorable light."

Of course, how hard is it to cast a dumb-ass trouper who would escalate a small-town courthouse parking-lot seatbelt ticket into a physical confrontation with a judge (in Louisiana no less) in an “unfavorable light”?

Stay tuned for round II in the cop vs judge dueling lawsuits.

Read more: Judge, trooper sue each other over 2009 traffic stop, arrest