Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge denies "choice of evils" defense (All Christine Trial Updates)
Oregonlive.com ^ | 5/2/02 | JEFF BARNARD AP

Posted on 05/02/2002 2:19:56 PM PDT by RGSpincich

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 461-464 next last
To: RGSpincich
... despin---witch!!
41 posted on 05/03/2002 3:39:36 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
Catholic practice on fasting is one full meal and two smaller meals that, together, don't add up to a full meal.

However, Catholic practice on this is that children under the age of 14 don't fast.

42 posted on 05/03/2002 3:45:45 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Doesn't matter if there's a special instruction. The Jury can acquit for whatever reason they wish including blue sky. That's the right of a Jury. That's why it is such a powerful tool against government tyranny.
43 posted on 05/03/2002 4:02:55 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Demidog
Doesn't matter if there's a special instruction. The Jury can acquit for whatever reason they wish including blue sky. That's the right of a Jury. That's why it is such a powerful tool against government tyranny.

So the OJ jury was upholding freedom, huh?

44 posted on 05/03/2002 4:04:03 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TruthWillWin
Posters from previous threads have been insisting that there is no evidence that the children were not being properly cared for.

There isn't.

45 posted on 05/03/2002 4:06:24 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
So the OJ jury was upholding freedom, huh?

You have to put up with some bad decisions when you allow people to excercise their rights. Yes. In essence they were upholding freedom. They didn't trust the state or the methods they employed and told them so via a vote of no confidence in their case.

46 posted on 05/03/2002 4:08:03 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Demidog
Yup. But, of course, if the jury votes to convict in this case, you'll be screaming about tyranny all over again, and how the jurors are worthless sheeple.
47 posted on 05/03/2002 4:22:07 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Demidog
Doesn't matter if there's a special instruction.

Already there are rumblings about the jury. And if they don't acquit they will be called "pawns of the prosecutor"? The instruction would have let them acquit on the illegal act. Without the instruction the jury must convict when the charges are proven. It does matter, if the jury follows the law.

Unless the Christines argue the diminished capacity defense. Which in essence has them admitting they did the wrong thing because they were distraught. Think Brian can admit he made a mistake by taking his former children back at gunpoint?

48 posted on 05/03/2002 4:28:36 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah ; Catspaw ; TruthWillWin ; Roscoe ; Demidog ; all
Steele begins to cover up. Old news mixed with new quotes from Steele.

May 2, 2002
Defense takes 'body blows' in prelim hearing

On the stand: Ruth Christine testifies about the cut
on her daughter Lydia's head during pre-trial motions
in Douglas County Circuit Court Wednesday in Roseburg.

By CHRIS POLLOCK
The trial of alleged kidnappers Brian and Ruth Christine still hadn't formally begun, but their lawyer said after Wednesday's preliminary hearings that their case had received "body blows."

"This was a tough day," said defense attorney Edgar J. Steele. "We took some real damage."

The bulk of Wednesday's pre-trial testimony centered around a motion by Steele to suppress all evidence gathered by Grants Pass police during a search of the bus where the Christines and their children lived in July 2000. After the search, Oregon Department of Human Services workers took the Christines' children into protective custody.

Brian and Ruth Christine, both 29, are on trial in Douglas County Circuit Court for robbery, kidnapping, and custodial interference over an incident in August 2001 at an Interstate 5 rest area near Myrtle Creek. Brian Christine is accused of taking three of his daughters, then aged 3, 4, and 6, at gunpoint from two social workers. He and his wife then allegedly fled with their children to Montana, where they were caught several days later.

Both Brian and Ruth Christine took the stand Wednesday afternoon to counter testimony from Grants Pass Police Detective Dan Evans that their children seemed malnourished when he first saw them. Evans said his department received an anonymous tip that children who were part of a family that lived in a bus parked near a local library were being mistreated. Evans then went to the location and met with Ruth Christine. She was holding the couple's youngest daughter, Miriam, at the time, he recalled.

"I was immediately struck by how skinny the arms and legs were of the child she was carrying," Evans said. "You could see the folds of skin on her arms. Her head appeared large in proportion to her body. She seemed listless."

Evans also said another daughter, Lydia Christine, had a cut on her forehead that appeared to have festered when he examined it later at a hospital.

"It was pointed out to me that it smelled funny," Evans said. "I smelled it. It smelled like rotten flesh."

Later, when Brian Christine took the stand, he admitted "swatting" Lydia on the back of the head, causing her to fall and hit her forehead on a step in the bus. Both Brian and Ruth Christine testified that Brian had never hit any of their children before.

"Normally she would get a light spanking," Brian Christine said. "I was pretty frustrated with Lydia. I wasn't angry."

Brian Christine said he disciplined Lydia for peeing in the bus in an act of defiance.

Brian Christine also said he and his wife had felt intimidated into allowing Evans into their bus.

"The conversation I had with him led up to one thing," he said. "And that was that they weren't going away."

The Christines claimed that a Grants Pass police officer, either Evans or someone else, had threatened to arrest both of them and drag their children out of their bus "kicking and screaming." When asked about the Christines' allegations, Evans vehemently denied he ever made such statements.

"That would be a bald-faced lie," he said.

Prosecuting attorney Rick Wesenberg had no comment after court adjourned for the day. Steele, after admitting Evans' testimony was damaging, said he had no plans to have the Christines testify again.

"That's the only time you will ever see my clients on the stand in this trial," he said.

Jury selection for the trial was expected to begin this afternoon in front of Judge William Lasswell. The judge was also expected to rule this morning on whether the Christines were coerced into letting Evans on the bus to question the children.

End Article

The jury is now selected and the motion denied.

49 posted on 05/03/2002 6:01:08 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
My memory's a bit vague on the fasts in the Catholic church when I was young O so long ago, but fasts were not allowed for young children.
50 posted on 05/03/2002 6:19:17 PM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Already there are rumblings about the jury.

By whom? Please be specific.

51 posted on 05/03/2002 6:37:36 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
but fasts were not allowed for young children.

And for good reason. In this case I would say the biggest danger was the father acting out his aggressions on a hungry kid who was perceived as being "defiant".

52 posted on 05/03/2002 6:38:08 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Yup. But, of course, if the jury votes to convict in this case, you'll be screaming about tyranny all over again

If the jury votes to convict then that will be their right. And I doubt the Judge will tell them (as usual) that they have a right to nullify.

53 posted on 05/03/2002 6:40:03 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Demidog
You.

The Jury can acquit for whatever reason they wish including blue sky.

Then why bother with instructions at all?

54 posted on 05/03/2002 6:42:44 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Demidog
And I doubt the Judge will tell them (as usual) that they have a right to nullify.

What makes you think that the jury would want to "nullify" laws against child abuse, kidnapping and armed robbery?

Time to look for a new martyr, Demidog.

55 posted on 05/03/2002 8:07:06 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Defense takes 'body blows' in prelim hearing

Karma.

56 posted on 05/03/2002 8:08:22 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
I haven't made any "rumblings" about the jury at all. You made that up because you don't have anything better to do apparently.
57 posted on 05/03/2002 8:45:18 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
What makes you think that the jury would want to "nullify" laws against child abuse, kidnapping and armed robbery?

What makes you think that's what I meant? Are you suffering from some sort of mental health problems?

58 posted on 05/03/2002 8:46:18 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Demidog
I haven't made any "rumblings" about the jury at all.

Bunk. You tried to create grounds on which the jury could ignore the facts of the case and render a verdict sympathetic to your viewpoint. "Blue Sky" grounds, your words.

59 posted on 05/03/2002 9:40:32 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Demidog
There isn't.

How do you explain the following:

Evans also said another daughter, Lydia Christine, had a cut on her forehead that appeared to have festered when he examined it later at a hospital. "It was pointed out to me that it smelled funny," Evans said. "I smelled it. It smelled like rotten flesh.

60 posted on 05/03/2002 10:12:32 PM PDT by TruthWillWin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 461-464 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson