🔊 ‘Swayed jury’ claim, pop-vid partier, hero tribute, Xbox, Lady Bird love: Humboldt Last Week
Quick local stories (weekly) 🔼 — HLW Alt Radio (24-7) 🔽
In the latest episode of Humboldt Last Week (127)
Lady Bird Johnson Memorial Grove footbridge by Mark Larson
More anonymous grand juror claims in a tense homicide investigation, pop music video partying, a heroic woman’s sacrifice was honored, Humboldt cannabis’ major video game debut, honoring moms Sara Bareilles style, humanitarians will award HACHR’s leader, a (sorta) first for Reggae on the River, a politician’s upsides were celebrated after a controversy, hills and stairs appreciation, a statewide head honcho spun KHSU radio’s gutting, Lady Bird love, and other stories currently being discussed throughout the county.
Check out HLW Alternative Radio in the kymkemp.com navigation bar, too! ⬆️
Humboldt Last Week also has the Humboldt Attraction of the Week, event picks of the week, lightheartedness, and crime updates. On 99.1 KISS FM Mondays, kymkemp.com, and always on HLW Alternative Radio.
Humboldt Last Week partners: Summer Arts and Music Fest – Ferndale Music Company – Bongo Boy Studio – Northtown Coffee – Eel River Organics
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
🕯🌳🎼⛾👍🏾👍🏾
Thanks, Willie ☺️
Re: The Grand Jury, and a “local lawyer” saying the issue of self-defense shouldn’t have been presented:
Really? Four or five men kicking the living shit out of one man in an unprovoked attack, and self defense shouldn’t have been considered? For Charmaine’s scenario to play out, that’s the only possibility.
Otherwise, she has to admit that one of her son’s buddies killed him.
That charges have never been brought against the attackers, and the possibility of self defense been front and center since the beginning, shows how far backwards we have bent to accommodate their cries of racism.
Enough is enough.
There is a similar situation (other than no one being killed) in Eureka, with law enforcement molly-coddling five people who attacked two.
I guess in a nod towards “inclusivity,” EPD is protecting them even though they’re white.
Here’s that section of the Lumberjack article: https://thelumberjack.org/2019/05/08/jury-swayed-from-murder-charges/
…
David Wise, a San Francisco criminal defense attorney, said a grand jury’s objective is to decide whether or not there is probable cause and enough evidence to indict or not indict a person who may have committed a crime. Wise has 26 years of legal experience and went on to say if a defendant never claims self-defense but claims innocence, then that is a decision for a regular jury, not a grand jury.
“They can decide the acts they heard can determine the murder was malicious, but they wouldn’t say it was because of self-defense,” Wise said. “The grand jury is there to decide on either indictment or no indictment, and self-defense never comes into play.”
Former Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos agrees with Wise and said if a suspect denies they did a crime, then self-defense doesn’t make sense as an option.
“Under those circumstances it doesn’t make sense to me,” Gallegos said. “That makes things a little more quizzical or puzzling.”
…
The lawyer-speak is removing the human-speak from the reality of deliberations, and that’s been explained elsewhere. If, based on the evidence, the juror’s conclude that the circumstances were mitigating, they’re by all means expected to make their personal decision based on that. We’re talking about charging somebody with murder, for crying out loud. The jurors were, in fact, given the legal definition of self-defense in writing. The jurors did NOT, as the most recent lumberjack article implies, unanimously agree that Zoellner stabbed Lawson, nor did they unanimously agree that it was an act of self-defense. There were no unanimous decisions. Somebody’s not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Somebody went to the grand jury proceedings as a juror and already had it in mind that Zoellner had murdered Lawson, and that’s not justice. Remember, even though they had the opportunity to question Zoellner, they didn’t. Yet the jurors in both articles claim he is a dangerous murderer. It’s not right.
The source was more critical of the grand jury deliberation process and less decided that the former suspect is a murderer. They used the term “killer.” Maybe they felt they needed more than six hours to decide. And yeah, they chose not interview the former suspect although they were allowed to — the source in the KAEF-TV article said DA staff encouraged them not to.
But this is a prosecution-only trial. “Killer(s)” isn’t an option, Zoellner is personally accountable. Five hours of talking over three days, with all night and morning to think about it after every couple of hours, is a lot of time. Try discussing this case based on what you know about it for five hours.
As a human being, would you not want to hear somebody tell their side of the story as to whether or not they should be thrown in a box for the rest of their life? The fact that anybody can be in any way successfully “encouraged” to not hear somebody defend themselves while deciding their fate is disgusting. Imagine how that scenario pans out in any other major media murder case you can think of.
Yet, in this case, two federal jurors convicted Zoellner of murder, are lambasting his name in the media, and didn’t even want to hear him defend himself. Who “swayed” them to decide somebody’s fate like that?
You either did it – in self defense – or you didn’t do it. Stabby says he didn’t do it. Now he should get to defend that claim.
Stabby did, at the initial proceedings against him. He said he doesn’t deserve the nickname. Do you think his story has changed? What about the stories of the witnesses who already testified against him, do you think their stories have changed? What did they say at this trial? Do you know what the legal definition of gang violence is, and how committing acts of gang violence effects the severity of punishment? Have you seen the physical proportions of Zoellner and the physical proportions of the three people who did, in fact, simultaneously beat him unconscious? Have you seen the physical proportions of the others who possibly assaulted Zoellner as well? Would you have it that three members of a white organization not be charged as a gang for teaming up to knock a black person half their physical size unconscious?
Do you not agree, at this point in time, that if anything is to be demanded of Zoellner, in the very least the same should be demanded of those who kicked the shit out of him? Where are the witnesses against Zoellner, Josiah’s own best friends, refreshing our memories of their experience at the scene of the crime?
In other words, demonstrate that you’ve put yourself in Stabby’s shoes, based on what you know about it, please.
The whole thing about the grand jury being “swayed” in the Lawson case is being as misrepresented as the crime itself. And that’s been described by the DA as part of the problem surrounding getting a fair trial in Humboldt.
By all accounts…please read every mention of the grand jury proceedings in local media if you don’t believe me…it’s common for the prosecution to “sway” the jury to indict. It’s so common, in fact, as to be expected.
How is that not potentially more absurd than “swaying” the jury not to indict? It’s really idiotic to assume that because no indictment was handed down, the jury must have been somehow unjustly convinced that a major criminal proceeding wasn’t called for.