OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

[Gregg]

Not that it matters but I think the best possible scenario for Heather is the Appeals Court finds she should have been prevented from representing herself and remands her for re-trial with a more extensive Faretta Hearing and/or a psychiatric evaluation and then a retrial. It's not going to just say ''she's innocent" and let her go, it MIGHT, just maybe, order the case remanded and should that happen there is a microscopic but theoretical possibility that the prosecution could decide not to bother, although its equally possible that an asteroid will crash into the earth and end all human life.

Her best hope is still that a court finds she's too batshit crazy to understand reality.

[Jeffrey]

A treat for the gang, Randall's appeal:

https://www.scribd.com/document/4000379 ... ane-Appeal

When Tucci-Jarraf stated that she believed her orders in this “cleanup” came from Commander Thorak, the government was quick to point out that he is a fictional character from World of Warcraft.

Randy's new lawyer seems like a big shot and expensive.

[notorial dissent]

I don't know where else this is going, but it will be interesting to see what they do with it. Oral argument(if they grant) could be a real trip.

[Judge Roy Bean]

A treat for the gang, Randall's appeal:

https://www.scribd.com/document/4000379 ... ane-Appeal

When Tucci-Jarraf stated that she believed her orders in this “cleanup” came from Commander Thorak, the government was quick to point out that he is a fictional character from World of Warcraft.

Randy's new lawyer seems like a big shot and expensive.

Actually, no. And I don't think it's costing the defendants anything. It's an educational exercise. I think he and his students are taking on what I see as a valuable analysis of what should be involved in determining whether or not nutball people like Randall and TJ are competent to represent themselves. For one, I don't believe they are. The idea of representing oneself in today's informational swamp of Internet nonsense is folly, IMHO. Anyone with a computer can convince themselves of all kinds of fantastic legal theories as evidenced by the instant case.

We need to have some guidance from the courts on this subject and this exercise is one step toward getting it.

[Gregg]

I don't know where else this is going, but it will be interesting to see what they do with it. Oral argument(if they grant) could be a real trip.

If this does get an oral argument, and its in Cincinnati (6th Circuit Court of Appeals) I'm willing to sacrifice a vacation day to attend in person.

[Gregg]

A treat for the gang, Randall's appeal:

https://www.scribd.com/document/4000379 ... ane-Appeal

When Tucci-Jarraf stated that she believed her orders in this “cleanup” came from Commander Thorak, the government was quick to point out that he is a fictional character from World of Warcraft.

Randy's new lawyer seems like a big shot and expensive.

Actually, no. And I don't think it's costing the defendants anything. It's an educational exercise. I think he and his students are taking on what I see as a valuable analysis of what should be involved in determining whether or not nutball people like Randall and TJ are competent to represent themselves. For one, I don't believe they are. The idea of representing oneself in today's informational swamp of Internet nonsense is folly, IMHO. Anyone with a computer can convince themselves of all kinds of fantastic legal theories as evidenced by the instant case.

We need to have some guidance from the courts on this subject and this exercise is one step toward getting it.

I agree with you. I'm not very sympathetic to HATJ's appeal, she was graduated from a good law school and should have known better, but in Randy's case, I'd more than leaning towards agreeing with the arguments presented here.

[notorial dissent]

Randy's appeal is coming courtesy of a "legal clinic" staffed by law students, and presumably run and supervised by a professor or mentor. I don't know how good the school they are working from is or how qualified they are. As near as I can see it, the appeal, in both cases, is hanging on what constitutes 1) competent to stand trial, and 2) what constitutes competent to competent to conduct their own defense. It would appear that "didn't do it" is right off the table except in HAT's case where her attorney is trying to get her out from under the special circumstances of being an attorney and helping in the commission of a crime. The problem, as I see it, with that line of defense is that they pretty much provably did what they were charged and convicted of. So, that leaves competence of the individual and of their actions. Now on an individual case I don't think Randy is competent to tie his own shoelaces, but, as I have been told many times by the IAAL types that doesn't preclude him being tried for his crimes. I also think HAT is nuts, same as I would any religious whack job, whether she is serious or running a con, but the law doesn't look at it that way, same reference. Then we get to the competent to conduct issue, I don't think EITHER of them is competent, and most particularly NOT when the charges are as serious and technical as these. It is easy to make those kinds of observations from this remove, but it all comes down to what the judge saw and thought. What it does enter in to it is that both HAT and Randy, even when given the aid of elbow counsel, refused to accept that counsel and wanted to represent themselves. They wouldn't have accepted it and would have undoubtedly fought it, so we are now where we are.

[Pottapaug1938]

In 1977-78, as a senior law student, I practiced law, at my law school's clinic, under the supervision of licensed members of the bar. At least once, I had to ask to dismiss a client because they would not listen to me, and wanted me to adopt lines of argument which I knew were unethical or legally unsound. I have no doubt that Randy and heather will prompt the same result from this clinic.

[Jeffrey]

Randy's appeal is coming courtesy of a "legal clinic" staffed by law students

How is something like that usually set up? Does the clinic go looking for Randy or does Randy have to reach out to them? Can we interpret this as Randy sobering up?

[notorial dissent]

In 1977-78, as a senior law student, I practiced law, at my law school's clinic, under the supervision of licensed members of the bar. At least once, I had to ask to dismiss a client because they would not listen to me, and wanted me to adopt lines of argument which I knew were unethical or legally unsound. I have no doubt that Randy and heather will prompt the same result from this clinic.

I'm impressed that it has gotten this far as it is and they haven't started in on the sovcit or woo, early days yet.

[Gregg]

I halfway suspect that once Randy has someone read the appeal to him, he'll fire them and insist on going it alone again.

[notorial dissent]

Yeah, about what I'm expecting. To be perfectly hones I can't believe that HAT let anyone claim she was incompetent to put on a defense or that she was delusional. Still early days, time enough to fire their attorneys and start filing all sorts of woo. I can't believe her followers are happy with it, although it may be over their reading comprehension levels.

[Resume]

Cindy Kay Currier issues an arrest warrant for Beaner and the Tooch.

https://youtu.be/gsxR1GEFyoY

[Pottapaug1938]

Randy's appeal is coming courtesy of a "legal clinic" staffed by law students

How is something like that usually set up? Does the clinic go looking for Randy or does Randy have to reach out to them? Can we interpret this as Randy sobering up?

In Massachusetts, there is a law which allows senior law students to take pro bono cases under the supervision of at least one member of the bar. The local bar associations are okay with that because they don't lose fee-paying clients, and gives the law students some real-life experience for when they too are members of the bar. The clients come to the clinic, often by referrals; the clinics don't actively solicit clients, except maybe by a posted notice in the local district or probate courts.

[Jeffrey]

But they're already in jail...

[Pottapaug1938]

But they're already in jail...

I imagine that some clinical programs deal with criminal law, and involve student visits to the pokey to meet with clients.

[Jeffrey]

I mean why issue an arrest warrant if they're already in jail.

[Judge Roy Bean]

I don't think that's an issue, here, Jeffrey. This is a post-conviction appeal.

There are a host of law school programs that are involved in similar matters. IMHO it's a valuable modality for defense cases and it also introduces students to first-hand involvement in real-world issues. Obviously, they get to meet with their clients. That, in and of itself can be a revealing experience, particularly in cases like this.

Where else can you meet face-to-face to explore a case with the truly delusional?

[Gregg]

if either case does get an oral argument, does the defendant have a right to attend?

[GlimDropper]

I mean why issue an arrest warrant if they're already in jail.

Cindy Kay Currier's sand castles in the sky never quite reach down to consensus reality, so yea, that's why. This isn't to say she isn't cagey. Both Heather and Randy's appeals functionally renounce the woo and embrace how diminished in capacity they were for believing in it, now Cindy sees some oft fleeced faithful looking for a new guru. Why shouldn't it be her?