STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 25617
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#676

Post by Foggy » Fri Jun 10, 2016 7:59 pm

Cardinal

Why, I even know a fine university whose colors are cardinal and gold. :trojans:


... and how does that make you feel?
What is it you are trying to say?
:think:

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8908
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#677

Post by Mikedunford » Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:16 pm

Flatpointhigh wrote:
bob wrote:
RVInit wrote:Red is a good, strong color for us mean women!
Already claimed by the Super Grumpy Geezer group. :boxing:
Well, then how about Scarlet? or chartreuse?
NOT chartreuse. Under any circumstances. It renders as a really nasty green that I can't read against the background.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7483
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#678

Post by Flatpointhigh » Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:20 pm

Mikedunford wrote:
Flatpointhigh wrote:
bob wrote: Already claimed by the Super Grumpy Geezer group. :boxing:
Well, then how about Scarlet? or chartreuse?
NOT chartreuse. Under any circumstances. It renders as a really nasty green that I can't read against the background.
ok. neon orange? :blink:



"It is wrong to say God made rich and poor; He only made male and female, and He gave them the Earth as their inheritance."- Thomas Paine, Forward to Agrarian Justice
Cancer broke me

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8908
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#679

Post by Mikedunford » Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:23 pm

Flatpointhigh wrote:
Mikedunford wrote:
Flatpointhigh wrote: Well, then how about Scarlet? or chartreuse?
NOT chartreuse. Under any circumstances. It renders as a really nasty green that I can't read against the background.
ok. neon orange? :blink:
Would probably be an improvement over the chartreuse, yes. The chartreuse was so bad that I literally could not read the word "chartreuse" - I had to cut and paste to find out what it said.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Sugar Magnolia
Posts: 8973
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:44 am

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#680

Post by Sugar Magnolia » Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:29 pm

Mikedunford wrote:
Flatpointhigh wrote:
Mikedunford wrote:
NOT chartreuse. Under any circumstances. It renders as a really nasty green that I can't read against the background.
ok. neon orange? :blink:
Would probably be an improvement over the chartreuse, yes. The chartreuse was so bad that I literally could not read the word "chartreuse" - I had to cut and paste to find out what it said.
Yeah, I had to hit the reply box to read it.



User avatar
Paul Lentz
Posts: 3661
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:56 pm
Location: Downtown O-town

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#681

Post by Paul Lentz » Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:43 pm

Sorry to cover old ground...the truth is that I'm watching the videos in order, and I'm only on Day 2, PM session.

So, Sweet Thang and Sugar Doodle, please tell me this: Was it cold in the courtroom? Did it seem unusually cold, or just the typical Florida difference between 90 degrees outside and 75 degrees inside (that you adjust to pretty quickly), or was it more like going from 90 degrees outside to 65 degrees inside, and you never did get used to it?

I know this seems like a silly question but, since there is no longer any need for me to hurry my video viewing, I'm savoring, and trying to observe some of the nuances.

Thanks!


The love of power will not win over the power of love.
Orlando, Florida 6/12/16

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 7382
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#682

Post by Orlylicious » Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:51 pm

It's great fun to watch slowly. Inger's feet spinning under the desk :lol:

P-Girl and Slim, do you know who the people in the audience on the other side of the jury were? Seems like Gimmy must have been off camera center since that's there the judge threw him out.

Paul, a while back you posted the possible sentences. If you can find that, could you please repost it?



User avatar
Turtle
Posts: 2169
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:27 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#683

Post by Turtle » Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:53 pm

Paul Lentz wrote:Sorry to cover old ground...the truth is that I'm watching the videos in order, and I'm only on Day 2, PM session.

So, Sweet Thang and Sugar Doodle, please tell me this: Was it cold in the courtroom? Did it seem unusually cold, or just the typical Florida difference between 90 degrees outside and 75 degrees inside (that you adjust to pretty quickly), or was it more like going from 90 degrees outside to 65 degrees inside, and you never did get used to it?

I know this seems like a silly question but, since there is no longer any need for me to hurry my video viewing, I'm savoring, and trying to observe some of the nuances.

Thanks!

At your leisure, I would be interested in your opinion of the (visible) jurors reaction during the Dana Johnson testimony, as well as Terry's testimony.



User avatar
Karen Walker
Posts: 1911
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:31 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#684

Post by Karen Walker » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:03 pm

I didn't watch Dana Johnson's testimony since the Bootsies had us covered. I may go visit it if anyone can point me to the day & time marker if they know it.



User avatar
Paul Lentz
Posts: 3661
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:56 pm
Location: Downtown O-town

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#685

Post by Paul Lentz » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:21 pm

Turtle wrote: At your leisure, I would be interested in your opinion of the (visible) jurors reaction during the Dana Johnson testimony, as well as Terry's testimony.
I'm only seeing 2 jurors--both men, one on the end (juror #1, I think, who is a slender fellow, balding, always wears sprung seat jeans--or maybe he just has no ass) and the other man (juror #2, bald but for a fringe, very proud belly). #1 is an unusually quiet man in terms of his movements, and he often takes a posture with his arms crossed against his chest and abdomen. Because of his slender build and that consistent posture, I've been thinking that the fellow just doesn't naturally generate much heat internally, and he may be self-defensively "hugging" himself against the cold of the courtroom (and that's one (but not the only) of the reasons for my question about the courtroom temperature. #2 holds a more open posture and moves a bit more. Meaning no disrespect to anyone anywhere, his build suggests to me that he may very well be better equipped to generate his own heat via his own built-in, umm, fat stores.

Given the above, I honestly did not see anything remarkable in either juror's demeanor during Dana Johnson's testimony which made me take note, although it's certainly possible I missed it. And I've not yet seen Trussell's testimony (still on day 2, and despite my curiosity and the tempting descriptions posted here, I'm being self-controlled about watching the videos in order...and given my current tendency to severe headaches when viewing video/TV/a computer screen, I'm sad to say that it will probably be Sunday before I get to Trussell's testimony).


The love of power will not win over the power of love.
Orlando, Florida 6/12/16

User avatar
Turtle
Posts: 2169
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:27 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#686

Post by Turtle » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:47 pm

Paul Lentz wrote:
Turtle wrote: At your leisure, I would be interested in your opinion of the (visible) jurors reaction during the Dana Johnson testimony, as well as Terry's testimony.
I'm only seeing 2 jurors--both men, one on the end (juror #1, I think, who is a slender fellow, balding, always wears sprung seat jeans--or maybe he just has no ass) and the other man (juror #2, bald but for a fringe, very proud belly). #1 is an unusually quiet man in terms of his movements, and he often takes a posture with his arms crossed against his chest and abdomen. Because of his slender build and that consistent posture, I've been thinking that the fellow just doesn't naturally generate much heat internally, and he may be self-defensively "hugging" himself against the cold of the courtroom (and that's one (but not the only) of the reasons for my question about the courtroom temperature. #2 holds a more open posture and moves a bit more. Meaning no disrespect to anyone anywhere, his build suggests to me that he may very well be better equipped to generate his own heat via his own built-in, umm, fat stores.

Given the above, I honestly did not see anything remarkable in either juror's demeanor during Dana Johnson's testimony which made me take note, although it's certainly possible I missed it. And I've not yet seen Trussell's testimony (still on day 2, and despite my curiosity and the tempting descriptions posted here, I'm being self-controlled about watching the videos in order...and given my current tendency to severe headaches when viewing video/TV/a computer screen, I'm sad to say that it will probably be Sunday before I get to Trussell's testimony).
Thanks, no hurries. There have been a few discussions about the jurors with their arms crossed, we see in the video and possibly others that the BOTG reported. The other issue may have been the seating- they weren't in pews, but the seats still seem to have little in the way of arm space.

I noticed, especially during the defense case, they are attentive.



User avatar
Turtle
Posts: 2169
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:27 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#687

Post by Turtle » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:52 pm

Also the guy on the end, he may have done it during trial and I didn't notice, but after the verdict, he props a foot up on his knee and sorta leans back to listen to the judge's final statements, like "my work is done and I can relax now"



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43180
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#688

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:25 am

Has anyone mentioned how good the trial judge was? He was excellent and exhibited good judicial demeanor in the face of Garcia's disrespectful performance and her attempt to tie up the proceedings with all of her frivolous paperwork.

When you appear before a no-nonsense judge, don't do what Garcia did. Also, when you have your client testify, make sure he doesn't change his theory of the defense in the direct examination and lie his ass off. Because if you do, the judge will allow the other side to re-open (or, here, recall excused witnesses).

And if your client lies his ass off, you better get an acquittal on all charges, because if your client is found guilty, a no-nonsense trial judge will be a little unhappy that the defendant lied his ass off in front of the judge and jury come sentencing.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 23548
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#689

Post by bob » Sat Jun 11, 2016 1:47 am

Were there any flags in the courtroom? Did they have fringe?

Asking for a friend. :-


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
boots
Posts: 2746
Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#690

Post by boots » Sat Jun 11, 2016 2:03 am

Sterngard Friegen wrote:Has anyone mentioned how good the trial judge was? He was excellent and exhibited good judicial demeanor in the face of Garcia's disrespectful performance and her attempt to tie up the proceedings with all of her frivolous paperwork.

When you appear before a no-nonsense judge, don't do what Garcia did. Also, when you have your client testify, make sure he doesn't change his theory of the defense in the direct examination and lie his ass off. Because if you do, the judge will allow the other side to re-open (or, here, recall excused witnesses).

And if your client lies his ass off, you better get an acquittal on all charges, because if your client is found guilty, a no-nonsense trial judge will be a little unhappy that the defendant lied his ass off in front of the judge and jury come sentencing.
I agree, his demeanor was impeccable and he had an enormous amount of patience...on the surface...What is really sad for Inger's client is that if he harbors any resentment over the crap she filed and put him through, he gets to pay for it. Her being rude to the judge in chambers was just bizarre, other than being impressive only to someone as clueless as Trussell, there is no upside to that. I actually think that Trussell would've been better off wit his sit down and drink coffee defense that he started out with.



User avatar
Dr. Blue
Posts: 847
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:01 am
Occupation: Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#691

Post by Dr. Blue » Sat Jun 11, 2016 4:31 am

Karen Walker wrote:
Patagoniagirl wrote:OH holy holy holy shit! Where do we send flowers!!!!!!
Probably here:
Dixie County Jail
:snippity:
No, not flowers to the dickhead.

How about we send flowers to the clerk and Siegmeister who had to put up with Trussell's shit? And I assume it was the clerk who was so helpful all along about unlocking documents and making the videos available (which was just awesome). There's a Fogbow precedent for flowers, I understand, and I'll chip in if it happens.



User avatar
Slim Cognito
Posts: 4522
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:37 am

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#692

Post by Slim Cognito » Sat Jun 11, 2016 7:41 am

Paul Lentz wrote:Sorry to cover old ground...the truth is that I'm watching the videos in order, and I'm only on Day 2, PM session.

So, Sweet Thang and Sugar Doodle, please tell me this: Was it cold in the courtroom? Did it seem unusually cold, or just the typical Florida difference between 90 degrees outside and 75 degrees inside (that you adjust to pretty quickly), or was it more like going from 90 degrees outside to 65 degrees inside, and you never did get used to it?

I know this seems like a silly question but, since there is no longer any need for me to hurry my video viewing, I'm savoring, and trying to observe some of the nuances.

Thanks!
As for the temp, it was cold walking in, but I adjusted quickly and was perfectly comfortable wearing short sleeves.

I'll try to answer other questions in this post:

Orlylicious - We don't know who they were but they entered and exited through the same door as the judge so we figured they were official somebodies. Gimmy, and most of TT's posse, sat in the set of pews behind the defense, we sat behind the prosecution table. Bob and Vel of American Patriot news sat in the front row, right in front of us, and a few other people drifted in and out, sitting in the pews behind us.

Turtle - I can tell you about their reaction during Ms Johnson's testimony. Mostly bored, (we all were). Inger droned on and one, repeating, repeating, repeating, blue file, public file, page number, blank page, blue file, official file, page number.....for over three hours. Towards the end, when Ms Johnson was clearly reaching the limits of her patience, everyone perked up. She (DJ) was wonderful. She never spoke inappropriately and the words coming out of her mouth were the exact words that needed to come out of her mouth, but she began speaking them very deliberately, like she was talking to a child. That was one of the highlights of our two days there.

Paul - Juror #1 we often wondered if he'd fallen asleep (during DJ's testimony). I think he just settled into a comfortable position and stayed there. He was slightly more animated throughout the rest of what we saw. I think PG was more observant of the jurors than I was. Maybe she'll get a chance to chime in.

Bob - Ha! Honestly, I don't know. I'd assume there would be some behind the bench, but I can't see them in my mind's eye so I can't help your "friend" with his fringe question.


ImageImageImage x4

User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 16011
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired Mechanical Engineer

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#693

Post by Volkonski » Sat Jun 11, 2016 8:10 am

Karen Walker wrote:They are mostly Democrats because their momma, daddy, granma, grandaddy & great-grans were Democrats cause that's just how it's done. However - they're all (mostly) conservatives and go to church every Wednesday & Sunday.
Edit: ETA: My family were all Democrats but the liberal kind. My Gram & Gpa moved to Alachua County in 1923 & folks there thought my Gram was a damn Yankee for a long time cause she was from way up north... Richmond, VA. She hated that. :rotflmao:
Yes. When our daughters were young it was impossible to schedule anything like a band parents' meeting or girl scouts for a Wednesday evening because so many folk went to church then. This was in coastal Texas east of Houston.

I had a similar problem growing up in a heavily Roman Catholic town in southeastern Massachusetts. Most of my friends had church school Saturday mornings so there was no one to play with.


Image“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43180
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#694

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Jun 11, 2016 9:00 am

I have finished listening to Trussell's testimony again. I have changed my mind. He should be prosecuted for perjury. It was too blatant and the proof that it was perjury is there.

Often perjury charges are sour grapes or piling on. Neither of those situations exists here. Trussell lied persistently and prodigiously. He lied constantly on material matters. The documents he signed by themselves impeach significant portions of his testimony.

If the oath a witness takes before he testifies is to be honored, Trussell needs a perjury prosecution. And at least another 5 years.

Sad, yes. But Trussell did it to himself. His perjury is just as bad as the other crimes he committed.

But, I am sure the prosecutor would cut him a break if he turned on those who engineered the perjury. If, for example, a defense lawyer told him to lie and helped him lie, turning on the suborner might get him a reduced sentence, maybe even a concurrent sentence.



User avatar
Slim Cognito
Posts: 4522
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:37 am

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#695

Post by Slim Cognito » Sat Jun 11, 2016 9:19 am

Sterngard Friegen wrote:I have finished listening to Trussell's testimony again. I have changed my mind. He should be prosecuted for perjury. It was too blatant and the proof that it was perjury is there.
And everyone who knows him, knew he was perjuring himself on that witness stand. They'd heard him brag about his power, how SA Siegmeister was about to be arrested because of their true bill. They'd heard the shtick about SA Siegmeister tainting the statutory grand jury and he had to dismiss it, about the CLGJ being more powerful than SCOTUS and this was how they were going to take back their country. Vel, of American Patriot News, assured me the CLGJ was as strong as ever, although I'd liked to have asked her how she felt about him disavowing it.

Nonetheless, everyone in that gallery, who was there to support Trussell, knew he was lying. Every. Damn. One.


ImageImageImage x4

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43180
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#696

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Jun 11, 2016 9:32 am

Hey, Terry: Tell the prosecutor who helped you commit perjury, get those people indicted and convicted, and I'm sure it will cut your sentence. (On the perjury charges.) Pull an Iafrate.



User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 6163
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 2 dogs, 1 cat, and 1 horse

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#697

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Sat Jun 11, 2016 10:01 am

Karen Walker wrote:I didn't watch Dana Johnson's testimony since the Bootsies had us covered. I may go visit it if anyone can point me to the day & time marker if they know it.
Day one afternoon session I believe.


"The people must know before they can act, and there is no educator to compare with the press." - Ida B. Wells-Barnett, journalist, newspaper editor, suffragist, feminist and founder with others of NAACP.

User avatar
Patagoniagirl
Posts: 3534
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#698

Post by Patagoniagirl » Sat Jun 11, 2016 10:29 am

Techno Luddite wrote:
Sterngard Friegen wrote:Has anyone mentioned how good the trial judge was? He was excellent and exhibited good judicial demeanor in the face of Garcia's disrespectful performance and her attempt to tie up the proceedings with all of her frivolous paperwork.

When you appear before a no-nonsense judge, don't do what Garcia did. Also, when you have your client testify, make sure he doesn't change his theory of the defense in the direct examination and lie his ass off. Because if you do, the judge will allow the other side to re-open (or, here, recall excused witnesses).

And if your client lies his ass off, you better get an acquittal on all charges, because if your client is found guilty, a no-nonsense trial judge will be a little unhappy that the defendant lied his ass off in front of the judge and jury come sentencing.
I agree, his demeanor was impeccable and he had an enormous amount of patience...on the surface...What is really sad for Inger's client is that if he harbors any resentment over the crap she filed and put him through, he gets to pay for it. Her being rude to the judge in chambers was just bizarre, other than being impressive only to someone as clueless as Trussell, there is no upside to that. I actually think that Trussell would've been better off wit his sit down and drink coffee defense that he started out with.
My impression, and my belief is that this Judge will not let Inger's behavior influence him at sentencing. TT's behavior will. The judge was no-drama throughout except for Gimme being booted and that was a long time coming.



User avatar
Paul Lentz
Posts: 3661
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:56 pm
Location: Downtown O-town

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#699

Post by Paul Lentz » Sat Jun 11, 2016 10:34 am

bob wrote:Were there any flags in the courtroom? Did they have fringe?

Asking for a friend. :-
:-D The flags of the United States of America and the State of Florida are directly behind Judge Hankinson's right and left shoulders, respectively, as he sits on the bench. While the video is not sharp enough for me to tell if there is fringe on the flags' edges, it is clear that there are gold tassels coming down about 8-10" from the top of (at least) the USA flagpole, which generally suggests a fringy flag.

Perhaps someone with the skill to enhance (sharpen, most particularly) the raw videos could provide a more specific answer.


The love of power will not win over the power of love.
Orlando, Florida 6/12/16

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43180
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: STATE OF FLORIDA v TERRY TRUSSELL - BOTG REPORTS

#700

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Jun 11, 2016 10:48 am

I think the three "pop up" fake grand jury members should be prosecuted for perjury, along with Trussell. They will turn state's evidence, I suspect, if they are offered a deal. I also think Dowdell and Smith should be prosecuted for conspiracy to commit the crimes that Trussell has been convicted of committing.

If Trussell doesn't Iafrate her, Inger Garcia can represent him again. After all, she knows the case!



Post Reply

Return to “Terry Trussell”