Jury court – Trial Jury http://trial-jury.org/ Thu, 19 May 2022 20:04:47 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.9.3 https://trial-jury.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/cropped-icon-32x32.png Jury court – Trial Jury http://trial-jury.org/ 32 32 Connecticut Supreme Court Orders New Trial For Firing Original Developers Of Dunkin’ Donuts Park – Hartford Courant https://trial-jury.org/connecticut-supreme-court-orders-new-trial-for-firing-original-developers-of-dunkin-donuts-park-hartford-courant/ Thu, 19 May 2022 19:25:13 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/connecticut-supreme-court-orders-new-trial-for-firing-original-developers-of-dunkin-donuts-park-hartford-courant/

Hartford — In the ongoing, years-long saga over the construction of Dunkin’ Donuts Park, the state Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ordered a new lawsuit regarding the City of Hartford’s firing of the original developers in 2016 for not completing the stadium in time.

The original developers – Centerplan Construction Co. and DoNo Hartford LLC – filed a $90 million lawsuit in July 2016 challenging the termination. In 2019, a Hartford Superior Court jury sided with the city, accusing Centerplan and DoNo of missing the deadline. The jury also awarded the city $335,000 in damages.

On appeal, Centerplan, through its attorney Louis Pepe of McElroy, Deutch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, and DoNo argued that the trial court in 2019 did not allow them to present evidence they could not. not be held responsible for “countless flaws” in the ballpark designs because the architect was under the control of the city. This, according to the developers, led to cost overruns, delays in the construction of the ballpark, and ultimately the developers’ layoffs.

The Supreme Court, in a 5-0 decision, ruled that who had legal control of the architect and design of the stadium from January to June 2016 – from when a term sheet was executed until when the city fired Centerplan and DoNo – was ambiguous and, therefore, must be decided by the jury.

“The complaint was that the trial court had erroneously determined – before the start of the trial – that the [original developers] were responsible for all errors and omissions by the architectural team before, during and after construction,” Pepe said in an interview. “We argued that just couldn’t be the case. … [T]The architect was hired by the city before contracts were made with Centerplan and had begun the design and was in fact well completed before the city awarded its contract with the architect to Centerplan.

The original developers also argued on appeal that, under the terms of the contract and the common law, they were entitled to notice of default and an opportunity to cure the default before termination could be implemented. Evidence supporting this argument was improperly withheld from the jury during the 2019 trial, Pepe said.

“In construction, termination is the functional equivalent of capital punishment,” Pepe said. “The law is very clear that before imposing this extreme remedy, you must strictly comply with your obligations as an owner which are conditions precedent to termination. We argued that the city had failed to do so. … It was a question for the jury and it was improperly removed from the jury. If we go back to this trial and this question comes up, it becomes a question for the jury to decide. »

With the Supreme Court ordering a new trial, the city could be held liable for tens of millions of dollars in damages to Centerplan and DoNo. Judge Thomas Moukawsher, following the 2019 verdict, lifted restrictions that would allow a new developer to continue construction of apartments, retail and entertainment space and parking lots.

New developer, Stamford-based RMS Cos., has paved the way on one of four parcels that make up North Crossing, formerly known as DoNo. The project is a mixed-use development which includes apartments, parking and a restaurant.

“When we took over the case, we informed the city that before entering into a new development agreement with a new developer, they should understand that we would challenge the termination of these development agreements,” said Pepe.

The city and the new developer essentially proceeded at their own risk, Pepe said.

News @3

News @3


Find the day’s top headlines sent straight to your inbox weekdays at 3:00 p.m.

Mayor Luke Bronin said the decision was “disappointing” and the city “strongly” disagrees with it.

“Having said that, we believe the facts are clear and that a new trial will, once again, result in a decision in favor of Hartford,” he said. “If the city hadn’t fired Centerplan when we did, there would be no baseball in Hartford today, no development around the ballpark, and Hartford taxpayers would have been responsible for dozens millions of dollars wasted by Centerplan – with nothing to show for it.

Pepe, meanwhile, said he and his client were “delighted” with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

“The City of Hartford has grossly mistreated [Centerplan CEO Robert] Landino, his partners and his companies when he wrongfully terminated his construction contract for the Dunkin’ Donuts baseball stadium after it was substantially complete and did the same with his contracts with the development of the city-owned parcels neighbor before he could even start working on it. ,” he said. “Now the city will be held accountable for these wrongdoings and the prodigious pain and suffering they have caused. We look forward to the new trial that the Supreme Court has ordered.

The Supreme Court ruling is another chapter in an ongoing battle that began with an admittedly aggressive schedule that called for the minor league’s 6,100-seater park to be built in just 13 months, with the Yard Goats – the Double-A subsidiary of Colorado. Rockies – hosting their home opener in May 2016.

With construction delays, the Yard Goats played their first season on the road, with a new contractor brought in to complete construction. The project was completed in 2017.

Ken Gosselin contributed to this story.

Johnny Depp, Amber Heard: a decision that could turn against him during a legal battle https://trial-jury.org/johnny-depp-amber-heard-a-decision-that-could-turn-against-him-during-a-legal-battle/ Thu, 19 May 2022 03:53:12 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/johnny-depp-amber-heard-a-decision-that-could-turn-against-him-during-a-legal-battle/ Amber Heard’s legal team may be planning for Johnny Depp to return to the helm, but experts say there’s a reason that could work against her.

Amber Heard recalling Johnny Depp to the stand could be a ‘risk’, in part because of his sympathy when he first testified in the defamation lawsuit he filed against his ex-wife, sources have said. legal experts.

Sources close to Heard said The post office last week that his legal team could ask Depp to testify again as they argued alongside him in the ongoing court battle in Fairfax, Va.

But such a plan could backfire, as the actor, who had already been on the witness stand for four days, came across as credible and sympathetic to the jury, experts said. Giving him a second round at the helm could unintentionally hurt Heard’s case.

“There’s a risk he’ll spend more time being sympathetic on the stand,” civil attorney Katherine Lizardo said, “when it’s actually time for Amber Heard to present her case.”

Seattle defamation attorney Bruce Johnson agreed that Depp’s apparent sympathy could be a problem for Heard.

“It’s a huge risk if he’s a good witness and he’s going to perform well again,” Mr Johnson said. The post office.

Halim Dhanidina, a criminal defense attorney and former California judge, said Depp’s “very unique personality” likely led him to appeal to the jury the first time around.

“He didn’t really strike me as someone who was roleplaying or fabricating,” he said. “The jury is going to want to know if they can rely on testimony not based on the intelligence of the witness, but on his sincerity.”

Depp, 58, is suing his 36-year-old ex-wife for $50m (A$70m), accusing her of defaming him when she called herself a ‘public figure representing domestic violence’ in a 2018 Washington Post editorial.

Heard filed a $100m (A$134m) countersuit, claiming it was Depp who defamed her by accusing her of lying about the alleged abuse.

His side are now presenting their case, concluding Heard’s fourth day on the stand on Tuesday, and continuing to call witnesses until closing arguments, scheduled for May 27.

“Right now, we’re hearing Amber Heard’s side of the story,” Ms. Lizardo said.

“Calling on your opponent to speak on your behalf seems counter-intuitive.”

Mr Dhanidina noted that Depp could try to get the “advantage” if he had the chance to address the jury again.

“If he landed with the jury and if the jury likes him, then more time before the jury is good for him,” he said. “Maybe it’s something that [Heard] does it out of necessity but [Depp] himself can benefit from it.

Jurors, however, would not receive an explanation as to why Depp is back on the stand, which could “confuse them”, Ms Lizardo added.

“Most of the time when you’re cross-examining it comes across as hostile,” she said. “A jury might think, ‘OK, he’s back on the stand. Are they harassing him again?

Libel barrister Mr Johnson also said Heard’s team needed to consider whether calling Depp again would attract the jury’s attention, as some jurors were reportedly spotted falling asleep while as the trial extends into its fifth week.

“You’re putting on a performance for a jury and you don’t want to drag it out too long,” Mr Johnson said. “In any long trial, that’s a consideration.”

Some of the pundits, however, said Heard’s legal team could try to get the better of Depp if they put him back on the stand.

“I would suspect they would want to cut [Depp] at the waist,” Virginia libel attorney Jeremiah Denton said. The post office.

“He behaved reasonably well in his first appearance at the helm, so I guess they feel they must necessarily attack his credibility – it could be his memory, his veracity [or] covering something that hasn’t been covered,” Denton said.

Dhanidina said Heard’s lawyers might be able to surprise Depp with their questions, as they “will likely have new topics and new areas to cover,” including topics they weren’t authorized to discuss. question the first time.

But the more time Depp has on the stand, the more opportunity he has to slip up and contradict something he has said previously, the experts all agreed.

“The more a witness talks, the more likely they are to say things that could be easily contradicted,” Mr Johnson said. “Even if they try to be honest, we all have memory lapses.”

Mr Dhanidina said he could not predict which side would benefit the most from Depp’s second stint at the helm, but if it happened it would certainly grab the attention of the world.

“Buckle up, because this is going to get really, really interesting,” he said.

“Any time you have a party questioned by the other side, it can be very, very difficult to predict who is going to win and whether it looks like a chess match or a knockdown fight,” Mr Dhanidina said. . “And we don’t really know what we’re going to get.”

Representatives for Depp and Heard both declined to comment.

This article originally appeared on the New York Post and has been reproduced with permission

Death penalty sought in Texas for man who admitted killing 5 people https://trial-jury.org/death-penalty-sought-in-texas-for-man-who-admitted-killing-5-people/ Wed, 18 May 2022 14:00:34 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/death-penalty-sought-in-texas-for-man-who-admitted-killing-5-people/

FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — Texas prosecutors said Monday they would seek the death penalty for a man who authorities say confessed to killing five people, including three whose dismembered bodies were found in a dumpster on fire last year.

The Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office said it filed the paperwork seeking the death penalty for 41-year-old Jason Thornburg. He was arrested in September for capital murder in the deaths of David Lueras, 42, Lauren Phillips, 34, and Maricruz Mathis, 33. Their bodies were found in a burning dumpster in Fort Worth.

FILE – This undated file photo provided by the Fort Worth Police Department shows Jason Thornburg. On Monday, Dec. 13, 2021, a grand jury in Fort Worth, Texas returned a capital murder indictment against Thornburg, who authorities say confessed to killing five people, including three whose dismembered bodies were found in a burning dumpster earlier this year. . (Fort Worth Police Department via AP, file)

During a police interview, Thornburg confessed to killing these three people as well as his roommate and girlfriend, according to his arrest warrant.

Thornburg also faces a murder charge in the death of her roommate, Mark Jewell, 61. He was found dead in a house fire last May.

Tanya Begay, a Navajo from Gallup, New Mexico, disappeared after a trip to Arizona with Thornburg in 2017.

In March, Thornburg was indicted by a grand jury for first degree murder, assault with intent to murder and assault causing grievous bodily harm in the March 2017 killing in the Navajo Nation of a person listed as TTB , according to an indictment. filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.

Thornburg remained imprisoned in Fort Worth on bail of over $1 million. His lawyers did not immediately return a message seeking comment on Monday.

Lawyers for former Fort Worth officer tell court they are needed elsewhere on murder trial date | PA https://trial-jury.org/lawyers-for-former-fort-worth-officer-tell-court-they-are-needed-elsewhere-on-murder-trial-date-pa/ Tue, 17 May 2022 21:32:09 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/lawyers-for-former-fort-worth-officer-tell-court-they-are-needed-elsewhere-on-murder-trial-date-pa/

FORT WORTH, Texas — Two attorneys who represent a former Fort Worth police officer who is due to stand trial next month for murder have filed a motion outlining their work in seven other cases they claim local and state legal code assigns scheduling priority.

The lawyers, Bob Gill and Miles Brissette, did not explicitly request a new trial date for Aaron Dean, but wrote in the motion that they had commitments elsewhere on June 21, when jury selection is due to begin. in the Dean case, and in the weeks before that date.

Among the considerations, the attorneys said in the motion they filed Monday, is that Dean is not being held in jail, as are the defendants in the contentious cases. Dean was released on bail.

Planning in conflicting cases must be resolved by Texas criminal procedure code, state code and local rules, according to the motion. The other Gill and Brissette cases should be given priority, according to the motion, because codes and rules elevate the cases of other defendants, who were charged before Dean, or because of the age of the victim or the nature of the case. ‘offense.

Scheduling issues have beset the trial of Dean, who is charged with the death of Atatiana Jefferson in Fort Worth in October 2019. The case, in Tarrant County’s 297th District Court, has already been delayed by the unavailability of two defense expert witnesses, other defense witnesses conflicting lawyers’ schedules, the illness of a third dean’s lawyer and, first, by a stalemate in trials caused by the coronavirus pandemic .

A grand jury has indicted Dean, who is white, with murder after he shot Jefferson, a 28-year-old black woman, through a window while responding to a call about open doors at her home. Jefferson was playing video games with her 8-year-old nephew, Zion Carr, when she thought she heard a prowler in the backyard, grabbed a handgun from her purse and pointed it at the window, said Zion to a forensic investigator, according to a warrant affidavit supporting Dean’s arrest.

Dean, 37, did not identify himself as a police officer and shot Jefferson seconds after seeing her through the window, according to body-worn camera video. He resigned from the police department the same day he was arrested, two days after the shooting. The department said he would have been fired had he not resigned.

Brissette is set to represent Clifford Glenn on June 23 at a final preliminary hearing in a child aggravated sexual assault case. The jury in Dean’s case is scheduled to hear opening statements on that date.

“Mr. Glenn is currently in poor health in the Tarrant County Jail. He has been confined for over 390 days based on these charges,” Brissette and Gill wrote in the motion.

Brissette is also due to start a bench trial for robbery on June 23.

Gill refers in the motion to several trials between now and the end of June that he is scheduled or preparing for. Gill also refers to his early June deadline to file an appeal brief.

The attorneys wrote that they were available to speak with prosecutors and Judge David Hagerman, whom they asked to grant a hearing on the motion.

Hagerman has occasionally expressed irritation at the hiccups that led him to continue. Most recently, on May 4, Hagerman adjourned the case because the Dean’s lead attorney, Jim Lane, has been ill for about two months and unable to prepare for trial.

Hagerman said the court “will not be held hostage indefinitely” by unknown factors, such as the length of Lane’s illness, which he said appears to be “serious, debilitating and possibly even serious.”

Hagerman described the postponement of the trial as a “monumental inconvenience” at the time.


©2022 Fort Worth Star Telegram. Visit star-telegram.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Copyright 2022 Tribune Content Agency.

Craig McLachlan’s partner Vanessa Scammell accused of ‘making up’ evidence in court https://trial-jury.org/craig-mclachlans-partner-vanessa-scammell-accused-of-making-up-evidence-in-court/ Tue, 17 May 2022 05:24:32 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/craig-mclachlans-partner-vanessa-scammell-accused-of-making-up-evidence-in-court/

The actor’s partner Craig McLachlan has been accused of ‘fabricating’ evidence to ‘bolster’ his case on day seven of his defamation trial.

McLachlan is suing the ABC, Nine Entertainment Co and actress Christie Whelan Browne over 2018 reports alleging he assaulted, harassed, bullied and exposed himself to female cast members during the 2014 Australian tour from the Rocky Horror Show.

McLachlan denies all allegations of sexual harassment and bullying in the stories and says they ruined his reputation and ended his acting career.

On her second day on the witness stand, McLachlan’s partner, bandleader Vanessa Scammell, was accused by the attorney representing the news networks of giving “false evidence.”

Ms Scammell told the jury that apart from two days she was in Brisbane while The Rocky Horror Show played in the city in 2014.

She said that meant she had seen the show about “four times” in its entirety and had seen act two about “15 times”.

In response, Michael Hodge QC said she had ‘exaggerated’ that number to ‘bolster’ Mr McLachlan’s case, suggesting she was retrospectively ‘inserting’ herself into the theater so that she would be present for the incidents in question.

Mrs. Scammell replied “no”.

Yesterday the jury heard from Ms Scammell that she was in McLachlan’s dressing room in Brisbane overhearing a conversation between her partner and Whelan Browne.

Ms Scammell claimed Whelan Browne came to the changing room door, ‘pushed her pubic bone out, pointed and said, ‘Can you see my slit through my lower parts? “”

In court today, Mr Hodge said that conversation did not take place in front of Ms Scammell in Brisbane and exclaimed ‘you made that up’.

Ms Scammell replied: ‘I didn’t.’

The jury also heard from actor Kristian Lavercombe, who starred in the 2014 production of The Rocky Horror Show.

Lavercombe, who gave evidence via video link from the UK, told the court he had played the role of Riff Raff “around 2,000 times” over the past 10 years.

The courtroom heard from Lavercombe that the actors were “quite affectionate” with each other and often kissed, hugged and sat on their laps.

He also spoke in court about the “risky” sense of humor he witnessed in McLachlan and Whelan Browne.

He claimed the co-stars “often pinched each other’s butts.”

The longtime performer described McLachlan’s mental state in the days following media reports of bullying and assault allegations.

Lavercombe told the jury, “I felt like I was on a little suicidal watch” and said he later saw McLachlan wearing a disguise to conceal his identity.

The trial continues.

Amber Heard’s spokesperson ‘fears’ a ‘shameful and desperate’ trial as court resumes https://trial-jury.org/amber-heards-spokesperson-fears-a-shameful-and-desperate-trial-as-court-resumes/ Mon, 16 May 2022 10:07:00 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/amber-heards-spokesperson-fears-a-shameful-and-desperate-trial-as-court-resumes/

As Amber Heard and Johnny Depp’s defamation lawsuit heads into closing arguments, the Aquaman The actor’s spokesperson has expressed fears that the lawsuit will turn sour.

Legal proceedings resume today after a very long break with Heard who is expected to be cross-examined by her ex-husband’s legal team on Monday.

“During cross-examination next week, Camille Vasquez plans to challenge Ms. Heard on the numerous lies and inconsistencies in her timeline which have changed significantly over the past six years,” a source said. Deadline.

During his testimony the first week of May, Heard pointed to the physical, emotional and sexual abuse allegedly committed by Depp.

However, the plaintiff should make efforts to draw the jury’s attention to Heard’s 2018 editorial.

“We expect Depp’s attorneys to go after the victim instead,” a spokesperson for Heard shared with the outlet.

“We fear this is both shameful and hopeless. And, the overwhelming evidence — the truth — is not on Depp’s side,” the rep added.

“The one thing we suspect Depp’s attorneys will avoid is the central issue of this lawsuit: Does Amber or a woman have a First Amendment right to free speech.”

McLachlan faces fifth day of field grilling https://trial-jury.org/mclachlan-faces-fifth-day-of-field-grilling/ Sun, 15 May 2022 17:32:00 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/mclachlan-faces-fifth-day-of-field-grilling/

Craig McLachlan will face a fifth day of questioning in his defamation case over media reports of sexual assault and harassment on The Rocky Horror Show in 2014 and other productions.

As the actor’s grilling continues on Monday, the New South Wales Supreme Court jury has already heard seemingly contradictory statements from McLachlan, 56, about whether he kissed or touched actresses during the show of 2014 without their permission.

While the Gold Logie winner denied some allegations reported by the ABC and Fairfax in January 2018, he admitted to “jokingly” kissing Christie Whelan Browne, 39, on the hips during a Rocky Horror bed scene .

He also admitted to giving what he claimed was a ‘greeting kiss’ to fellow actress Erika Heynatz, 47, in her dressing room, then sitting on her lap and kissing her neck in the green room of the theater, claiming that she had made a similar “vampire”. kisses” to the cast and audience members during the show.

On Friday, defense barrister Michael Hodge QC portrayed McLachlan as a powerful and angry actor who threw tantrums, shouted and physically assaulted cast members.

Mr Hodge said the actor threatened to send music supervisor Tony Castro to hospital after he interrupted one of his songs.

McLachlan is also accused of yelling and kicking a trash can after being asked to wear a wig and calling the other cast members ‘a bunch of untalented, ungrateful c****s’ after actor Tim Maddren, 38, altered his performance during a bed. scene in the 2014 staging.

McLachlan, who played Dr Frank N Furter on the show, has denied claims he grabbed Whelan Browne’s face and threw him aside during the performance. The actor has leveled his own accusations against Whelan Browne, claiming she bullied Heynatz over a locker room feud between the two women.

Texts from McLachlan in June 2014 show the actor referring to Whelan Browne as “Lucifer” and “selfish, delusional, disrespectful and downright mean”. Despite this, the actor maintained that his friendship with the actress did not deteriorate during production that year.

Another actress, Angela Scundi, alleges the lead actor forced his tongue down her throat during a performance during the show’s final song number while she was playing Columbia.

McLachlan denies that the song’s beat and lyrics left time for anything other than a “quick peck”, recreating this with partner Vanessa Scammell on several occasions for a Channel Seven interview on Spotlight that aired in May of Last year.

However, footage from a Perth show shown to the jury shows the actor kissing Columbia for a few seconds in the middle of the lyrics.

“Mr. McLachlan, we can see it. It’s not a momentary kiss, is it?” asked Mr. Hodge.

“It’s a performance, Mr. Hodge. It’s not a passionate kiss. It’s not a passionate kiss,” McLachlan replied.

The actor is suing the ABC, Fairfax and Whelan Browne for defamation over publications in January 2018 regarding allegations of misconduct during the 2014 production of The Rocky Horror Show and other productions.

He accused Whelan Browne, Heynatz and Scundi of approaching the media for fame or money.

Harrison County District Clerk’s Office and Federal Court Warn of Juror Phishing Scam | Local News https://trial-jury.org/harrison-county-district-clerks-office-and-federal-court-warn-of-juror-phishing-scam-local-news/ Sat, 14 May 2022 21:00:00 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/harrison-county-district-clerks-office-and-federal-court-warn-of-juror-phishing-scam-local-news/

MARSHALL — The Harrison County District Clerk’s Office is warning of a scam in which a caller poses as an office worker and asks a resident to register as a juror.

“We received phone calls (Thursday) about someone calling using the District Clerk’s Office phone number telling you that you need to register as a juror,” District Clerk Sherry Griffis said in a message on Facebook. “This is not the call from the Harrison County District Clerk’s Office. This is a scammer who uses our number to obtain personal information to use for illegal use. »

Griffis added that his office will never solicit information for jury duty.

“All of our jury information comes in the mail,” she said.

Griffis advised the public to be vigilant and to call the district clerk’s office at (903) 935-8409 with any questions.

Additionally, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, which has federal court in Marshall, also issued a jury scam warning.

Scams that target residents with false jury service statements prey on people’s fears by threatening arrest for a missed summons, officials say.

“The recent scams in federal courts are typical of fraudsters. Callers posing as court officials, U.S. Marshals or other law enforcement agents phoned random victims trying to convince them to pay a fine to avoid arrest for not having appeared as a juror,” court officials said. “The callers insisted that their victims bring cash or prepaid credit cards to the courthouse where they made an appointment.”

Federal court officials said a court will always send a jury summons by US mail and will never demand payment or sensitive information over the phone.

“In most cases, a prospective juror who disregards a summons will be contacted by the court registry and may, in certain circumstances, be ordered to appear before a judge. A fine may be imposed but not prior to the court appearance, during which an individual has the opportunity to explain a failure to appear,” explains the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas on its website.

David Harlow, acting director of the US Marshals Service, said the agency wants to educate the public about phone and impersonation scams so people can avoid falling victim to them.

“Rest assured that the US Marshals Service will never call anyone to arrange for the payment of fines over the phone for failure to appear as a juror, for outstanding warrants or for any other violation,” Harlow said.

Fraudulent callers sometimes disguise their phone numbers so that they appear as caller ID court or law enforcement numbers, officials say.

“They also sometimes transfer victims during calls to create the illusion that they are speaking with government offices.”

Woman refuses to speak during court appearance via video https://trial-jury.org/woman-refuses-to-speak-during-court-appearance-via-video/ Sat, 14 May 2022 11:56:00 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/woman-refuses-to-speak-during-court-appearance-via-video/

A Briarcliff woman with a history of attacking people inside and outside Baxter County Jail, and for remaining silent during court appearances continued her silent treatment during a Baxter County Circuit Court session recently. Twenty-nine-year-old Vanessa Renee Henschel appeared on a video login from the McPherson Unit of the Newport State Prison System where she is serving time for a previous conviction.

Deputy Public Defender James Wallace told Circuit Judge John Putman that the final psychological examination ordered for Henschel had not been completed.

Records show the examination was not completed because Henschel was uncooperative.

Wallace wanted the review completed, and the state made no objection. Prosecutor David Ethredge said Henschel could be found fit to prosecute and criminally liable for her actions even if she refused to speak to the examiner.

Ethredge said it wanted to be able to dispose of the two active cases against Henschel, both filed in 2020.

During the discussion of the unfinished psychological examination, Henschel stared straight ahead and said nothing.


Henschel’s appearance on Monday dealt with charges she filed in late January 2020 for attacking a landlord at a residence along County Road 15 after using the man’s truck without permission to take a trip into town and return.

While in jail on charges stemming from the alleged attack, Henschel got in trouble for punching a jailer on the left side of her face and head using her left fist and forearm.

The jailer recovered from the blow and attempted to restrain Henschel, but the inmate continued to be combative. After help arrived, Henschel was placed in a restraint chair for a brief period before being returned to her living area.

Henschel’s attack on the jailer resulted in charges of second degree battery and endangering the operation of a vital public facility. She also attacked a number of fellow inmates for no apparent reason, according to incident reports filed by the sheriff’s office.


In the January case, Henschel is charged with aggravated residential burglary, theft of property, aggravated assault and 3rd degree assault.

According to the probable cause affidavit filed in the 2020 case, the Baxter County Sheriff’s Office received a report of a burglary at a residence along County Road 15 in late January.

The owner said he arrived home to see his truck pull into the driveway leading to his residence. He said he saw a woman, later identified as Henschel, exit the truck and enter the garage. He told investigators he followed her and made contact in the garage.


After a conversation, Henschel allegedly punched the owner in the head, then armed herself with a pair of “hedge trimmers” and attempted to attack him.

The victim went to a neighbor to call 911.

The first Baxter County investigator on the scene recognized Henschel from previous encounters. The investigator asked Henschel what she was doing on the property. Unlike her court appearances, she spoke to the investigator, telling him she lived there.

The investigator asked her where she had been in the owner’s truck and she said she had been “to town and back”.


The owner and the investigator walked through the residence. They saw that the window above the kitchen sink had been smashed and blood was found on the sink and the floor.

It appeared that Henschel helped herself to snacks and a soft drink and rested in one of the bedrooms. They also found open dresser drawers and $60 in cash missing from a closet. The owner’s wife said clothes and jewelry were also stolen.

It was determined that Henschel was wearing some of the missing clothing and jewelry at the time of his arrest.


Over the years, Henschel has used his fists, a knife, a backpack, a forearm, and a hedge trimmer against his victims.

Among the victims are a former friend, her father, jailers and fellow prisoners. According to court records, the attacks were unprovoked.

Henschel had undergone several psychological evaluations to determine her fitness to pursue her cases and whether she could be held criminally responsible for her actions.

All but the last review have determined that she can be held liable. There was no report on the last assessment due to Henschel’s lack of cooperation.


During his time in prison, Henschel racked up nearly 40 major disciplinary breaches.

Violations include insolence towards a staff member, threatening to inflict injury, assault, disobeying orders, refusing to submit to drug tests, throwing or attempting to throw of substances and interference with operations.

The last offenses noted in his file were refusing to submit to a drug test and battery, both of which occurred on September 13 last year.


Henschel’s refusal to speak would have been treated differently in the British legal system of old. A process rarely used today allowed for a separate trial to allow a jury to determine the reason for an accused’s refusal to speak.

The jury could declare the defendant “mute from malice” or “mute due to a visitation from God”. In the past, if a defendant was mute by choice, he could be tortured until one of two things happened: he spoke or he died.

In the United States and most other countries, a defendant enjoys a constitutionally protected right not to speak during court proceedings or police questioning.

Web readyMT Powered by WireReady® NSI

federal court of laredo guilty trial migrant smuggling pregnant https://trial-jury.org/federal-court-of-laredo-guilty-trial-migrant-smuggling-pregnant/ Fri, 13 May 2022 21:41:38 +0000 https://trial-jury.org/federal-court-of-laredo-guilty-trial-migrant-smuggling-pregnant/ A federal jury in Laredo found a lawful permanent resident of North Carolina guilty of human trafficking after a one-day trial, the U.S. attorney’s office said May 11.

The jury deliberated for about four hours before convicting Aurelio Barajas-Pulido, 52, after a day-long trial. He could lose his permanent resident status in the United States.

Authorities said that on February 8, Barajas-Pulido attempted to drive a tractor-trailer through the Interstate 35 checkpoint in Laredo. Barajas-Pulido showed “suspicious behavior” during the inspection. A K-9 unit also alerted to possible contraband in the trailer.

Barajas-Pulido was referred to a secondary inspection, where authorities discovered 80 migrants, including three unaccompanied minors. A minor was pregnant, authorities said.

During the trial, the defense claimed that Barajas-Pulido was unaware that he was smuggling migrants. In the end, the jury did not believe the defense claims.

U.S. District Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo presided over the trial. Sentencing will be set at a later date. Barajas-Pulido faces up to 10 years in federal prison and up to $250,000 in fines.

Homeland Security Investigations investigated the case with the help of the US Border Patrol. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Matthew Isaac and Brandon Bowling prosecuted the case.