Sam in court today (June 22)

tapu wrote:oh yeah, and a question:

why would either side want the details of the murders to be "sealed forever"?

Perhaps the true details are so haunting that there is no value in discussing them.

Thanks for the welcome back and the responses! I was almost speechless, I mean looking at that...what to say? It just looks pure evil. I am still shocked and in disbelief! I was expecting this meek muted remorseful empty face to stare back at me- some dose of reality staring through...but he looks inspired by his actions and some kind of heroic stance. I know family and friends of his visit here and it is a loss to them losing him, and I want to state up front that I don't mean to offend, really I don't. But Wowsa! It just "looks" like he doesn't want to be defended, the old saying a picture is worth a thousand words... It doesn't look like a nervous smile, it looks like a devious one to me.
There was a guy from Farmville in the area doing some tattoo work..but he was talking about going back to the country. I said oh, what part of the country? He said Farmville..I was like oh shit were you close to where the murders took place? His response..what murders? I guess waiting for some time to pass it seems people are forgetting, good strategy I suppose. As far as the details, I guess my thoughts first go to Mels parents since Emmas family was wiped out... I feel so horrible for them if or should I say when this goes to trial? Will they give a victim impact statement? Will they be there? Will he take the stand? I am so curious. I would want answers. Hell I want answers but I am just on the outside.
Mental illness? Retardation? Immaturity? Abusive past? Drugs? Misfittism-(ok I made that one up) trying to impress?. What in the world. I think he is confident because of the fact he has been in protective custody, personally. I wonder if he will get the change of venue? I wonder is SKR supporters or horrorcore folks will be there? To think he is being idolized is really fucking scary. As much as I have my opinions of Sick and Raz AT LEAST THEY HAVENT CONDONED THIS SHIT.(Publicly) Thats all I have nice to say about it. At least they called police, and I feel it goes against "the code" they probably live by, it was the right thing to do considering. I don't know, I'm rambling, Im looking for something positive, Im not defending them, i dont know them I dont agree with them and I still wonder if they did the right thing...or they saved their ass from involvement... or influence or accessory. I dont know.
I think he wants to take it to trial just to get the details out so people will think he did what he said he was gonna do in his songs. Or to let out that he really didn't act alone. Thats probably the million dollar question. Has he made a plea? Did he hire his lawyer or is it a public defender pro bono? It will matter greatly for his defense, I feel.
I deserately want to know if he videoed anything, did yall ever figure that out yet?
And did anything come about if those hickeys were from Emma?
I wonder too much if there was some girl who was jealous of it all and demanded he prove his affection by acting this scenario out and desperate for love he complied... I bet there is alot of info on those computer and cell records though that fit the pieces all together. Im so confused how someone could do this.And do this. And do this, and do this AGAIN.
What has been available from the freedom of information act? Anything, or does that come later?
Sorry lots of questions, just catching up.

ziggy wrote:
You mean this smirk?

I can't help but believe - still - that the young man is simply a sociopath capable of murder. Maybe it built up for some time. An insanity defense will only help in sentencing because if there is a trial, he's toast imo.

I have to agree with your statement. I wonder if he hurt animals. Im quoting this pic because it looks to me like he is handcuffed in front? Is that the way it looks to yall? Is that normal for someone dare I say "high profile...no thats not it...accused of violent tendencies..."?

[quote="Scott"]

tapu wrote:Hello, Love.



Let's see... I just went back through this thread and I was thinking two things.... Oh yeah:

1. I could see where, if Sam really has certain social problems, then having him in the courtroom might actually benefit the defense. If he seems whacked enough, the jury may be convinced that he didn't understand the nature of the act. (M'Naughton, as I'm sure you guys know already. Not sure if M'N is the law in VA, but you get my drift.)

2. I know Sam is supposed to be smart in a lot of ways, and maybe it's just "social problems" or whatever (what the fuck are those, anyway? Is there clinical evidence for this?), but I get the feeling over and over that this dude is retarded. The gravity is sinking in?? Is he a concrete block?

Weird all around. tapu

I have yet to see.... "smart."
I am not sure he fully understands the nature of his act. He knows it is wrong. He knows he is in trouble. Not sure if he understands the actions as normal rational people do. I don't think there will ever be an explanation that will make sense to regular people becuase there is no set of circumstances that would prompt regular people to do what he did.
I think the way he continues to act makes it easier for the jurrors to sleep after they agree to put the needle in his arm. If he demonstrates no remorse he is unlikely to find any mercy among those making decisons about him.
Though is life in prison mercy????[/quote]

May benefit if he is insane and screams out his Jesus made me do it rant again or something of that nature.
I cant speak for Tapu but I think she might mean smart..like computer smart. He was supposed to a good computer designer or something to that effect if I recall correctly.
And I have to agree about the bold by me. Remorse? I guess his demeanor doesn't quite portray that so the lawyer had to say that although I think it was inappropriate.....he doesn't have much to work with from the looks (pun intended) of things.

There are so many wonderful post that contribute to meaningful discussion here that I might be quoting for a few, I hope noone thinks I am trying to take over, its mostly to thank and agree and pat yall on the back here. What an awesome thread I must say!

Speaking only for myself [don't we all right?]. I don't think you are trying to take over. I appreciate the contribution. That is kind of what forums are about.
Speaking to some of your earlier posts
1] About the position of Sam's hands. I beleive he is cuffed on a belly belt [chain around his waist]. In my experience that is a standard way to transport prisoners. Though the hands are in front they are in many ways more restricted than they would be in traditional handcuffs and the belt can be used for additional control if he were to try to escape or fight with a guard. He is high profile and high risk becuase of the crimes he is accused of but I suspect none of the officers working with him are afraid of Sam. None of the other inmates in prison will be afraid of him either. Only disaffected teenagers that lack life experience think he is a celebrity or tough guy. He kills women, children, and a priest in a cowardly manner. He is not tough.
2] I beleive family would have a right to give a victim impact statement if they wanted to though I am not an expert and other can weigh in.
3] All evidence that I know of points to only Sam and suggests that he acted alone.
4] Bowen is a private attorney but Sam could not begin to pay what he would cost. There is money to be made on any capital case from various funds.
5] I think the defense will ask for and get a change of venue but it won't change the verdict.

Scott wrote:Speaking only for myself [don't we all right?]. I don't think you are trying to take over. I appreciate the contribution. That is kind of what forums are about.
Speaking to some of your earlier posts
1] About the position of Sam's hands. I beleive he is cuffed on a belly belt [chain around his waist]. In my experience that is a standard way to transport prisoners. Though the hands are in front they are in many ways more restricted than they would be in traditional handcuffs and the belt can be used for additional control if he were to try to escape or fight with a guard. He is high profile and high risk becuase of the crimes he is accused of but I suspect none of the officers working with him are afraid of Sam. None of the other inmates in prison will be afraid of him either. Only disaffected teenagers that lack life experience think he is a celebrity or tough guy. He kills women, children, and a priest in a cowardly manner. He is not tough.
2] I beleive family would have a right to give a victim impact statement if they wanted to though I am not an expert and other can weigh in.
3] All evidence that I know of points to only Sam and suggests that he acted alone.
4] Bowen is a private attorney but Sam could not begin to pay what he would cost. There is money to be made on any capital case from various funds.
5] I think the defense will ask for and get a change of venue but it won't change the verdict.

I cant believe he wasnt shot or killed somehow outside the courthouse honestly.I know alot of ppl who do the exact opposite of worship him and prob be psycho enuff to do it if they could. lol

So - according to the following article the attorneys had an August 16th deadline to file all motions in this case and they are due back in court September 30th with the prospective trial date in October!

Does anyone else think it's unbearably odd that the journalists in this area aren't watching this?

Also,in the article, Bowen is not definitive in his change of venue opinion. If all motions had to have been filed by Aug. 16th - wouldn't that certainly have been on of them and wouldn't we know by now?

So by the looks of it: trial by Farmville jurors in October. Yowwwza.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Edited to add: not that I actually think anything within the legal system can really move that fast, expecially a death penalty case so I don't expect a trial in October, but would be happy if it happened.

Is it possible that change of venue will be addressed Sept 30? I do not beleive motions filed are necesarily available to the public. Is it possible that the motions have in fact been filed and we just don't know about them? Maybe journalist aren't watching because it is just a slow time in the process and there is nothing to report. I suspect they will all be back on the courthouse steps Sept 30 and will be camping out the day before the actual trial.

In my totally non professional opinion I still think venue gets changed...and it will make no difference. I have been wrong before.

The motions were filed and will be argued on September 30th. Bowen said he wouldn't know whether he would ask for change of venue until jury selection had begun. He weighed the prejudice versus well rested jurors who get to sleep in their own beds and therefore have a longer attention span or are more alert.

At any rate, looks like Sam McCroskey is going to stand trial for mass murder.

Okay just reread and article says Sept 20. I have been writing and thinking Sept 30 too. I checked with the court web site. It is in fact SEPT 20.

Oh, THANK YOU - I stand corrected. September 20th is better!

A motion to change venue is usually filed after jury selection because a party generally needs to show difficulty to seat an impartial jury. I posted a thread on this a few months back.

Usually is the key word there. In some high profile cases, even though prejudice is not presumed simply because the case is high profile, the defense attorney will seek a change of venue if the
case has sordid facts that appeal to voyeuristic tendancies of the public and the victims, although not celebrities, have been publicized and also when the crime is extremely heinous and it's huge news in a smaller community. I think his attorney could argue that this case fits into the criteria. Change of venue motions have been argued and granted pre voire dire...that way - if it's pretty much a given they can begin jury selection where they know the trial will be held.

Andes, why do you think Bowen is waiting? Has there not been enough media coverage of the murders? Does he know the change of venue will most likely happen when he requests it and therefore it will give him more time to prepare his case when they stop jury selection locally and begin again in the new location? How do some defense attorneys prove prejudice even before jury selection has begun. I know we've seen it in other high profile cases. What's the main distinction here?

Interesting...I found this and may have answered my own question:
United States v. McRae, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32411 (W.D. Tenn. Apr. 15, 2009)

The Defendant sought a change of venue because of the pretrial publicity. (McRae, 1-2). The Defendant’s evidence of prejudice included a hard copy exhibit of a blog of local events. The blog contained anonymous comments concerning the case, which the Defendant claimed prejudiced his case.

The State opposed the granting of the change of venue arguing that voire dire is the best way to go about determining if there was any actual prejudice.

"Courts can find a defendant has been prejudiced from pretrial publicity when 'an inflammatory, circus-like atmosphere pervades both the courthouse and the surrounding community.' McRae, 5. "

So basically unless the media vans and the entire circus is camped out in town constantly, the Court must evaluate actual prejudice against a defendant by questioning the jury pool during voir dire...and in the case cited here they denied the change of venue because they did not find a “trial atmosphere that [has] been utterly corrupted by press coverage.”

I'm sure in some future case there will be a way to prove pre-trial prejudice by online publicity analogous to the circus-like atmosphere in town but documenting that would probably be difficult...blogs, tweets, etc. How would a poor defense attorney have time to research that and compile enough to show actual prejudice? Probably too daunting a task so instead, for now they wait until voire dire.

ziggy wrote:Interesting...I found this and may have answered my own question:
United States v. McRae, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32411 (W.D. Tenn. Apr. 15, 2009)

The Defendant sought a change of venue because of the pretrial publicity. (McRae, 1-2). The Defendant’s evidence of prejudice included a hard copy exhibit of a blog of local events. The blog contained anonymous comments concerning the case, which the Defendant claimed prejudiced his case.

The State opposed the granting of the change of venue arguing that voire dire is the best way to go about determining if there was any actual prejudice.

"Courts can find a defendant has been prejudiced from pretrial publicity when 'an inflammatory, circus-like atmosphere pervades both the courthouse and the surrounding community.' McRae, 5. "

So basically unless the media vans and the entire circus is camped out in town constantly, the Court must evaluate actual prejudice against a defendant by questioning the jury pool during voir dire...and in the case cited here they denied the change of venue because they did not find a “trial atmosphere that [has] been utterly corrupted by press coverage.”

I'm sure in some future case there will be a way to prove pre-trial prejudice by online publicity analogous to the circus-like atmosphere in town but documenting that would probably be difficult...blogs, tweets, etc. How would a poor defense attorney have time to research that and compile enough to show actual prejudice? Probably too daunting a task so instead, for now they wait until voire dire.

Yup, you basically answered your own question. I'm sure Bowen has compiled all that stuff, it's just a high bar of proof. During voir dire any sort of taint to the jury pool is actual and tangible, not abstract and hypothesized.

perhaps media will get involved when the anniversary comes up of that horrible crime and deaths of 4 people. it's awful that our judicial system waits a very long time to get a trial going. has anything else been heard by the families of the deceased? anything from sams' family?

@ Andreas - thanks for continuing to lurk around and jump in now and then. Yes, I'm getting better at legal research and answering the questions that ramble around in my head. Starting 2nd year classes in a few days and still continue to be excited about the journey.

@Maunsapt - haven't heard a peep, but you are right, that anniversary is in the near future and I suspect there will be follow up stories that bring the players out of the woodwork. I am most surprised at the silence from Mel's family! I hope we get a chance to hear from them soon.

I hope this goes to trial, i am very interested on whats gonna go down!!!!!

Hey piXy good to see you. The anniversary date is in 6 days. Can you believe it's only been a year? Seems like the process is taking forever.

I agree Ziggy, seems like it's been longer than a year. I hope we find out what went on and why also.

What went on??.. probably we will learn more.
Why??? There will never be a sufficient explanation that makes sense to rational people.

ziggy wrote:Hey piXy good to see you. The anniversary date is in 6 days. Can you believe it's only been a year? Seems like the process is taking forever.

yeah this time last year i was packing my shit waiting to go to Southgate, MI to meet them. I miss Mel so much, i have been thinking alot about her and Emma lately. I cant believe a year has went by so quickly.

pixy,do you know anything about mel's family at all?How are they holding up?....how are u btw?....any good news about your babies and the whole custody thing?

I dont know anything about Mel's family unfortunatly. It surprises me too that they have kept so quiet about everything.
im good, and no news yet claudici. things are still the same. I dont even have a new court date. =(