TRIAL! JUSTICE FOR JANE!

Channel 7: Jim Kiertzner
on Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:21 PM EDT
"I understand that" 50-year-old Joe Gentz repeatedly said to Judge Vonda Evans when she told him the prosecutor could withdraw his plea deal and charge him with First Degree Murder. That would mean automatic life in prison."
He obviously does NOT understand that despite what he is verbalizing. It seems that child-like he is totally focused on having HIS demand met and everything else is pushed aside and given no real consideration. Pathetic.

GPPGRL wrote:Channel 7: Jim Kiertzner
on Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:21 PM EDT
"I understand that" 50-year-old Joe Gentz repeatedly said to Judge Vonda Evans when she told him the prosecutor could withdraw his plea deal and charge him with First Degree Murder. That would mean automatic life in prison."
He obviously does NOT understand that despite what he is verbalizing. It seems that child-like he is totally focused on having HIS demand met and everything else is pushed aside and given no real consideration. Pathetic.

Exactly. Better that this child in a grown man rear its head now rather than while he's testifying. One can see how easy he is to manipulate. Once you reveal how Bob manipulates him, the defense could make the same claim about LE. I do not see how they determined JG was competent. It is another twist just when you think it can't get any weirder. If you saw this hearing, you saw what JG is. As mentioned, a child in a very big man's body. At first he wanted to do the right thing after realizing what a bad thing he did. But with limited ability he could not comprehend what prison life would be like. He had a tough time with the rules because he has the mind of a child. Someone put the bug in his ear that he should have gotten less prison time because of his testimony. They (jailhouse lawyer) also told him that he should not have been found guilty because the crime was committed under duress. So he asks for a better deal. Like the child he is, he wants what he wants and he wants it now. You could hear and see how frustrated his attorney was attempting to convince him he was putting his head in a noose. If he does not hold up his part of the plea agreement, it goes away and with it comes the possibility of a murder 1st degree charge with a very real probability of conviction. He will be spending the rest of his life in prison. No one, not the judge, nor his attorney could get that message into his head. It is what it is and the trial will go forward without him on the stand and perhaps that's a good thing. As you know the first rule of witness questioning is never ask something of a witness that you don't already know what the answer will be. I believe that would be exactly what would happen when questioning JG.

wwjd wrote:

EllsBells wrote:Now I'm more confused.

"In a second hearing, Judge Evans told attorneys they can not make any mention of Joe Gentz testimony in opening statements to the jury on Tuesday. Gentz's statements made under oath could still come in during the trial."  

Source:   http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/wayne-county/judge-to-hold-hearing-to-determine-if-joe-gentz-will-testify-in-bob-bashara-case


If the whole theory of the case is that Bashara coerced mentally challenged and financially beholden Gentz to murder his wife, why can't they mention that as the main thesis in the opening statement, but later Gentz's statements supporting this same thesis can be entered as testimony in the trial? Is the jury to conclude that the prosecution just suddenly figured out once testimony unfolded that Gentz was the patsy fall guy?  Seems like a non-sensical decision, please enlighten otherwise.  For one, I'm rapidly losing faith in Judge Evans.

what?????? Totally lost!

The judge said they cannot mention anything in opening statements about JG testifying in court, because he won't be. Not that his previous statements could not be used during the trial. I think there is also a ruling to be made on a motion defense is going to file concerning that as well. I believe the judge said that ruling would be made prior to trial beginning on Tuesday.

Listening to the JG hearing live yesterday, I was impressed by how aggressively confident Lisa Lindsey was. The message was a definite "We knew this (JG not testifying) could happen, it's a non-event, we're prepared, let's GO."

Evil never goes down without a fight, and I'm guessing we're in for some pretty frustrating weeks. But in the end, I can't see him getting acquitted when he's already confessed to trying to hire someone to kill JG. A person just doesn't go from an innocent, grieving husband to hiring a hit man, no matter the circumstances.

AnalyzeThis wrote:Listening to the JG hearing live yesterday, I was impressed by how aggressively confident Lisa Lindsey was.  The message was a definite "We knew this (JG not testifying) could happen, it's a non-event, we're prepared, let's GO."  

Evil never goes down without a fight, and I'm guessing we're in for some pretty frustrating weeks.  But in the end, I can't see him getting acquitted when he's already confessed to trying to hire someone to kill JG.  A person just doesn't go from an innocent, grieving husband to hiring a hit man, no matter the circumstances.

Does anyone know if the fact that Blob is currently serving time for a conviction of soliciting someone to murder JG in jail will even be allowed in this trial ? I think jurors(may already know this) but are usually kept from knowing a defendant is currently serving time for a sentence related to the case.That is why he is allowed to appear in court in a suit, not jail attire.  If this fact is allowed, the defense will claim it was Blob's attempt at revenge for JG murdering his wife. prosecutor will say it was to keep JG from testifying against him. Thus the need for jurors to use their "common sense".

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/26757260/bashara-and-gentz-in-court

"Gentz's attorney says he went to the police department with two friends in the early morning hours of January 31, 2012, to seek safety from threats from Bob Bashara."

Never heard this before.

https://justice4jane.forumotion.com/t62p250-preliminary-hearing-in-the-bob-bashara-murder-trial#8096

Per this post, I think enough will be allowed to make the point.

Snipped:

Phone calls between Joe and Bob--allowed!

evidence about Bashara intimidating, wanting to eliminate other witnesses--allowed!

Statements regarding State of mind of Joe Gentz in December/January 2011/2012 -- Allowed

smallal wrote:

The judge said they cannot mention anything in opening statements about JG testifying in court, because he won't be. Not that his previous statements could not be used during the trial. I think there is also a ruling to be made on a motion defense is going to file concerning that as well. I believe the judge said that ruling would be made prior to trial beginning on Tuesday.

Not a lawyer, but I have a layman's understanding that the accused has the right to cross examine any person entering statements against him in a trial ---  but if Gentz's prior statements are entered as testimony yet he won't take the stand, then obviously that can't happen.  Does classifying him as an "unavailable witness" change that?  This layman had assumed an "unavailable witness" meant either dead or missing, not someone who simply refuses to take the stand.  

Lindsay sounded confident that they are prepared to go forward with a solid case even without Gentz's testifying in person, hope she's right.


Discussion of unavailable witness ruling to be made this coming Tuesday: http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/wayne-county/2014/10/10/robert-bashara-murder-trial-joseph-gentz/17027893/

Aha! Got it now...

Here is why Judge Evans ordered defense to emergency motion a hearing to consider Gentz unavailable:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_804

(Clipped from above link, Rule 804, Federal Rules of Evidence)--

"Rule 804. Hearsay Exceptions; Declarant Unavailable

(a) Criteria for Being Unavailable. A declarant is considered to be unavailable as a witness if the declarant:

(1) is exempted from testifying about the subject matter of the declarant’s statement because the court rules that a privilege applies;

(2) refuses to testify about the subject matter despite a court order to do so;...."

chewet wrote:Aha! Got it now...

Here is why Judge Evans ordered defense to emergency motion a hearing to consider Gentz unavailable:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_804

(Clipped from above link, Rule 804, Federal Rules of Evidence)--

"Rule 804. Hearsay Exceptions; Declarant Unavailable

(a) Criteria for Being Unavailable. A declarant is considered to be unavailable as a witness if the declarant:

(1) is exempted from testifying about the subject matter of the declarant’s statement because the court rules that a privilege applies;

(2) refuses to testify about the subject matter despite a court order to do so;...."

Good find, Chewet, clarifying that an "unavailable witness" can be someone who simply refuses to testify --- at least by federal rules, assuming same for Michigan.  

Other than the definition of "unavailable witness," this federal rule --- if reading it correctly --- says that hearsay (statements made to others from the unavailable witness) and former testimony (hearing, trial et al) are allowable when a witness is officially deemed unavailable.  If that is correct, then the statements 1) Gentz made during hearings (for his plea deal and sentencing about being tricked then coerced under gun threat by BB) and 2) those he made to his buddy (who convinced him to turn himself in) about being coerced --- are allowable even though no chance to cross examine Gentz.  If this is a correct understanding and true for Michigan rules, then it seems like a good thing for the prosecution that Gentz is refusing.  Time will tell.

EllsBells wrote:Now I'm more confused.

"In a second hearing, Judge Evans told attorneys they can not make any mention of Joe Gentz testimony in opening statements to the jury on Tuesday. Gentz's statements made under oath could still come in during the trial."  

Source:   http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/wayne-county/judge-to-hold-hearing-to-determine-if-joe-gentz-will-testify-in-bob-bashara-case


If the whole theory of the case is that Bashara coerced mentally challenged and financially beholden Gentz to murder his wife, why can't they mention that as the main thesis in the opening statement, but later Gentz's statements supporting this same thesis can be entered as testimony in the trial? Is the jury to conclude that the prosecution just suddenly figured out once testimony unfolded that Gentz was the patsy fall guy?  Seems like a non-sensical decision, please enlighten otherwise.  For one, I'm rapidly losing faith in Judge Evans.

My understanding is that, since Joe is refusing to testify, the judge said they cannot mention in opening statements about Joe "testifying", since he won't be.  I believe they can present as evidence sworn depositions/testimony from Joe (although how they would get that in is unknown); they just won't have him there in person, and can't allude to him being there in person, since he won't be.

I know, clear as mud, right?  

Bashara's former handyman won't testify in court
Gina Damron, Detroit Free Press 5:29 p.m. EDT October 10, 2014


Gentz's decision means prosecutors could withdraw the plea and reinstate the charge of first-degree murder.

...Earlier this week, while reading the names of defense witnesses to prospective jurors in Bashara's trial, the defense listed Gentz.

Now, the defense plans to file a motion asking the court for a finding that Gentz is not available to testify, said Michael McCarthy, one of the attorneys representing Bashara.

"If that finding is made, then under the rules of evidence certain things that he said in the past can be admitted into evidence," McCarthy said.

At a hearing following Gentz's hearing, Evans told attorneys that, during opening statements in Bashara's trial on Tuesday, they can't say Gentz will testify.


Source:  http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/wayne/2014/10/10/gentz-court-hearing/17036329/

8

CuriousPortlander wrote:
Bashara's former handyman won't testify in court
Gina Damron, Detroit Free Press 5:29 p.m. EDT October 10, 2014


Gentz's decision means prosecutors could withdraw the plea and reinstate the charge of first-degree murder.

...Earlier this week, while reading the names of defense witnesses to prospective jurors in Bashara's trial, the defense listed Gentz.

Now, the defense plans to file a motion asking the court for a finding that Gentz is not available to testify, said Michael McCarthy, one of the attorneys representing Bashara.

"If that finding is made, then under the rules of evidence certain things that he said in the past can be admitted into evidence," McCarthy said.

At a hearing following Gentz's hearing, Evans told attorneys that, during opening statements in Bashara's trial on Tuesday, [b]they can't say Gentz will te

Source:  http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/wayne/2014/10/10/gentz-court-hearing/17036329/

You are all becoming great law students! Do any of you think the prosecution will eventually charge JG with first degree murder?

wwjd wrote: 8

CuriousPortlander wrote:
Bashara's former handyman won't testify in court
Gina Damron, Detroit Free Press 5:29 p.m. EDT October 10, 2014


Gentz's decision means prosecutors could withdraw the plea and reinstate the charge of first-degree murder.

...Earlier this week, while reading the names of defense witnesses to prospective jurors in Bashara's trial, the defense listed Gentz.

Now, the defense plans to file a motion asking the court for a finding that Gentz is not available to testify, said Michael McCarthy, one of the attorneys representing Bashara.

"If that finding is made, then under the rules of evidence certain things that he said in the past can be admitted into evidence," McCarthy said.

At a hearing following Gentz's hearing, Evans told attorneys that, during opening statements in Bashara's trial on Tuesday, [b]they can't say Gentz will te

Source:  http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/wayne/2014/10/10/gentz-court-hearing/17036329/

You are all becoming great law students! Do any of you think the prosecution will eventually charge JG with first degree murder?

I don't know if they will, but I was thinking about what a bad precedent it would set if they didn't.  Tells others they can make deals to benefit themselves, and then refuse to do as promised for others, without consequences.  I hope that's not the message they want to convey.


I would think what JG did was "break the contract", so does that automatically make his deal null and void?    Or does his sentence and conviction just remain as is unless challenged further?  I don't know.

CuriousPortlander wrote:

I would think what JG did was "break the contract", so does that automatically make his deal null and void?    Or does his sentence and conviction just remain as is unless challenged further?  I don't know.

Yes, it make the deal null and void --- as Judge Evans said if he didn't testify, he would then be charged with first degree murder which carries a life sentence if convicted.

I think he most definitely would be charged and hopefully this extended weekend and the legal action to be taken Tuesday morning and a discussion with a "real" attorney will make that crystal clear to him. I wonder if his former attorney is still involved somehow? I really liked her and she seemed to know how to communicate with him in a way he'd understand.

Amy Lange ‏@langeamyFOX2 51m51 minutes ago

Opening statements in the long-awaited trial of #BobBashara scheduled for 9am Tuesday @FOX2News we will livestream at http://myfoxdetroit.com

CuriousPortlander wrote:Amy Lange ‏@langeamyFOX2 51m51 minutes ago

Opening statements in the long-awaited trial of #BobBashara scheduled for 9am Tuesday @FOX2News we will livestream at http://myfoxdetroit.com

According to other reports including the one below, there is a hearing on an emergency motion re Gentz's unavailability scheduled at 9 am Tuesday, so likely that opening statements will be delayed possibly until noon per Judge Evans.

"In order for both legal teams to use previous statements made by Gentz during the trial — such as statements to police — Evans said they would need to receive an order from the court stating that Gentz was unavailable to testify. McCarthy said he would file an emergency motion for that purpose. At press time, Evans had scheduled a hearing on that motion for 9 a.m. Oct. 14 — the day Bashara’s murder trial was scheduled to start. We’re going to go forward (with the trial) on Tuesday,” said Evans, adding that they might start trial proceedings a little later in the day, possibly at noon."

http://www.candgnews.com/news/gentz-refuses-testify-bashara-murder-trial-78118

Kind of odd to start opening statements at the usual lunch hour of noon, but that's not so surprising given quirky Judge Evans.

D Free Press blog reports Evans saying proceeding will start at 9:30

George Hunter just tweeted this:

"I'm hearing the defense didn't file the motion for Gentz to be ruled unavailable. If so, we'll go straight to opening statements."

George Hunter from the Detroit News reporting that the Defense did not file the motion to have Gentz ruled "unavailable"


@GeorgeHunter_DN

Anyone know if the clickondetroit link is up yet? I can't get it

George Hunter ‏@GeorgeHunter_DN 21s22 seconds ago
Bashara's attorney Lillian Diallo just confirmed she didn't file the motion to have Gentz ruled unavailable, "because I didn't have to."

When asked why, Diallo said: "Wait and see." Does that mean prosecutors changed minds and allowed Gentz to amend his plea deal? Stay turned

meandmyshadow wrote:Anyone know if the clickondetroit link is up yet?  I can't get it

Not yet...

Nicole ‏@LadyJustice2188 2m2 minutes ago

Still waiting for openings to begin in the #BobBashara murder trial.

meandmyshadow wrote:George Hunter ‏@GeorgeHunter_DN  21s22 seconds ago
Bashara's attorney Lillian Diallo just confirmed she didn't file the motion to have Gentz ruled unavailable, "because I didn't have to."

When asked why, Diallo said: "Wait and see." Does that mean prosecutors changed minds and allowed Gentz to amend his plea deal? Stay turned

Lisa Lindsey sounded so firm about not needing his testimony, plus I thought it was the defense calling him. Could Diallo's statement possibly mean that Gentz decided to testify?

Here is another livestream link:
Bashara Opening Statements

This link has the camera up:  http://courtchatter.tv/bobbashara.htm

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/26775123/bashara-case-officially-starts-as-attorneys-present-opening-statements says "starting soon..."

AnalyzeThis wrote:

meandmyshadow wrote:George Hunter ‏@GeorgeHunter_DN  21s22 seconds ago
Bashara's attorney Lillian Diallo just confirmed she didn't file the motion to have Gentz ruled unavailable, "because I didn't have to."

When asked why, Diallo said: "Wait and see." Does that mean prosecutors changed minds and allowed Gentz to amend his plea deal? Stay turned

Lisa Lindsey sounded so firm about not needing his testimony, plus I thought it was the defense calling him.  Could Diallo's statement possibly mean that Gentz decided to testify?

According to George Hunter via twitter Gentz attorney stated that he would "stick around" over the weekend optimistic that a deal could still be cut........

AnalyzeThis wrote:

meandmyshadow wrote:George Hunter ‏@GeorgeHunter_DN  21s22 seconds ago
Bashara's attorney Lillian Diallo just confirmed she didn't file the motion to have Gentz ruled unavailable, "because I didn't have to."

When asked why, Diallo said: "Wait and see." Does that mean prosecutors changed minds and allowed Gentz to amend his plea deal? Stay turned

Lisa Lindsey sounded so firm about not needing his testimony, plus I thought it was the defense calling him.  Could Diallo's statement possibly mean that Gentz decided to testify?

I wondered this too, Analyze-- but thinking..."oh geez, was one of Monster Blob's minions one of those so-called 'jail house' lawyers"

Not a fan of Diallo and her last-second tactics...

chewet wrote:

AnalyzeThis wrote:

meandmyshadow wrote:George Hunter ‏@GeorgeHunter_DN  21s22 seconds ago
Bashara's attorney Lillian Diallo just confirmed she didn't file the motion to have Gentz ruled unavailable, "because I didn't have to."

When asked why, Diallo said: "Wait and see." Does that mean prosecutors changed minds and allowed Gentz to amend his plea deal? Stay turned

Lisa Lindsey sounded so firm about not needing his testimony, plus I thought it was the defense calling him.  Could Diallo's statement possibly mean that Gentz decided to testify?

I wondered this too, Analyze-- but thinking..."oh geez, was one of Monster Blob's minions one of those so-called 'jail house' lawyers"

Not a fan of Diallo and her last-second tactics...

Diallo is no match for Lisa Lindsey. I can't wait to see LL take that b down!

Migraine here checking in! When we started Justice 4 Jane this is the moment we were waiting for! I couldn't miss being here with you all for the beginning of the trial-- I am here representing the neighbors of Middlesex who have NOT forgotten. My J4J sign is in my yard so watch for a dozen purple balloons when we finally hear the word "GUILTY!"

MIGRAINE! So good to see you!!!!!!

kittygirl wrote:MIGRAINE!  So good to see you!!!!!!

Thanks, Kitty! I've missed you too!

starting

The judge is on the stand! Bob has not made an appearance yet......

She has some concerns over Bobber's health?  Did he say hhe was in the hospital?

Therese Griffin....obedient slave?

Bob was in the hospital last night?????
Insulin evidence is still not relevant.....according to the judge. there may be new evidence, but Judge Evans won't hear it without an additional motion being filed.

Yay, Migraine!!! Welcome back!!!

WHO DID SHE JUST SMILE AND WINK AT?  Judge Evans!

The Jury, I guess. She's interestingly inappropriate at times

tip of the iceberg, right?

Diallo is so fidgety...not exactly displaying a poker face either, unlike her client who shows absolutely no emotion whatsoever. Where is his supposed grief now?

George Hunter https://twitter.com/GeorgeHunter_DN
The judge is reviewing the video from the live stream now to determine if jurors were shown.

That's info judge got from court personnel; she will review the tape.

Media has picked up images of Juror #15 during live stream. Jeez.

After reviewing the video, judge said Juror #1 was shown. From now on, media may not shoot what's shown on the screen...

...which is apparently how the infraction occurred.

GPPGRL wrote:Diallo is so fidgety...not exactly displaying a poker face either, unlike her client who shows absolutely no emotion whatsoever. Where is his supposed grief now?

I am watching the live feed on freep.com. I cannot believe how she is acting. She is rolling her eyes, shaking her head negatively at everything Lisa says in her opening argument, and at one point she was writing so hard it drowned out Lisa. She reminds me of an obnoxious junior high school girl, not a lawyer.

Ohhhh I'm sure Bob is so relieved that he can set the record straight...

My eyes hurt from rolling them already.

That was a very predictable opening statement by the defense.

1) The investigators did not go where the evidence led them- rather the evidence went were the investigators led it.

2)  Bashara tried to hire a hit on Gentz because he was the confessed killer of his wife

3)  Witness credibility.

4) No pre-meditation or conspiracy. This was an impulse killing by Joe.

5) Heavy handed prosecution with a lot of POWER on their side.  Power is not guilt.

YAWN