The Chainlink

Amanda "Mandy" Annis killer trial Thursday March 4 2010

http://www.google.com/search?q=mandy+annis

Scheduled for 9 A.M. at Daley Center, room 405.

Expected to go all day, maybe into tomorrow.

Any supporters welcome to attend.

Does anyone know if they confiscate cell phones, MP3 players and the like?
Thanks.

Views: 223

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

last time I had jury duty (3 months ago) they did not, just make damn sure it is off in the court room
They do at the dupage courthouse. I was at Daley Center about a month ago and they didnt confiscate then.
Cook County won't confiscate any electronics, but keep them off, especially if they have a camera function. There's a rule concerning picture taking. If you're just there as a court watcher, you'll probably get a warning and then subsequent violations will result in you being asked to leave.
The reason I was asking (besides one of my guilty pleasures being plugged up and jamming whenever riding CTA) was that I tried to attend a trial at 26th/Cal a while back (I think it was for the Holy Name kids) and ffor whatever reason had a camera with me and they ordered me to "put it in my car." Others have had to hide stuff in the bushes outside the courthouse. I ended up walking home instead of attending (~4 blocks).
Would hate to have to beg the guy at Dunkin Donuts to watch my Nano for me.

Pete said:
Cook County won't confiscate any electronics, but keep them off, especially if they have a camera function. There's a rule concerning picture taking. If you're just there as a court watcher, you'll probably get a warning and then subsequent violations will result in you being asked to leave.
I'd write a summary of the day's events, but:
1) It was a very long and draining day
2) I've seen absolutely no evidence that anyone gives a damn.
I'm interested.

H3N3 said:
I'd write a summary of the day's events, but:
1) It was a very long and draining day
2) I've seen absolutely no evidence that anyone gives a damn.
Well, I'll lay out a basic framework at least, I'm trashed.

The trial was a bench trial, arguments presented only to a judge (I think the defendant waived the jury trial). Took place in traffic court, which is purportedly an unusual place for such a trial (there's a lot about this stuff I don't understand).

The thing went from about 9:30 all the way to 7 PM. About 2/3 of the room was full with Mandy's friends and family.

The charges were speeding, failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident, willful negligence . . . blanking on the other two.

Early on the prosecution presented witnesses including a guy who chased the perp down and was probably the only reason it didn't end up being an unsolved hit-and-run. He was an absolute angel.
Then a gal who was waiting at the light eastbound, basically watching the whole thing happen from a box seat. She was an angel too. Would like to hug both of them.

Then a bunch of police 'experts', mostly being asked stoopid-azz questions by the defense attorney who looked like a complete fool trying to discredit them.

Then at the end of the day the three guys in the car that killed Mandy-- first the back seat guy, then the twin brother in the passenger seat, then the other twin who was the driver.

All of them lied like rugs; the driver was most sophisticated. The prosecution had a fairly easy time making them look not very credible.

The defense attorney tried mostly in vain to liken Mandy's entering the intersection to a kid darting out unexpectedly between two parked cars, to make it seem like she'd threaded dangerously between standing vehicles to enter the intersection, to make a case that she'd "timed the light", and to make a case that she hit the car rather than the car hitting her (all of the technical experts made him look like an idiot with this tack, but he kept with it, even pretty clearly declaring that all of the technical experts were dishonest in his closing arguments.


The judge saw through all the BS I think, but in the end upheld all the charges except the willful negligence (or whatever it's called exactly) which is the only one that could have resulted in jail time.

The driver was sentenced with fines totaling 9 hundred and something, and was given the option to do bicycle related community service (64 hours) which he accepted, so no fines. Also supervision for I don't know how long.

The defendants and their families bolted immediately on the elevator so that the victim's family wouldn't seem them celebrating. Guessing they were coached to do so. I witnessed a major round of high-fiving among the 3 occupants as I was leaving.

I probably left enough out that this whole account makes no sense. Clarifying questions welcome.
So bicycle related community service, huh? I wonder what that is. Who had the right of way? I'm not familiar with this case - thanks for the debrief.

J.
Got the idea, Howard. This did make some sense. While it's unfortunate that the driver didn't get a stiffer penalty, I'm glad that there were good witnesses and that most of the charges stuck. Thanks for representing and for the good write-up.

H3N3 said:
Well, I'll lay out a basic framework at least, I'm trashed.

The trial was a bench trial, arguments presented only to a judge (I think the defendant waived the jury trial). Took place in traffic court, which is purportedly an unusual place for such a trial (there's a lot about this stuff I don't understand).

The thing went from about 9:30 all the way to 7 PM. About 2/3 of the room was full with Mandy's friends and family.

The charges were speeding, failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident, willful negligence . . . blanking on the other two.

Early on the prosecution presented witnesses including a guy who chased the perp down and was probably the only reason it didn't end up being an unsolved hit-and-run. He was an absolute angel.
Then a gal who was waiting at the light eastbound, basically watching the whole thing happen from a box seat. She was an angel too. Would like to hug both of them.

Then a bunch of police 'experts', mostly being asked stoopid-azz questions by the defense attorney who looked like a complete fool trying to discredit them.

Then at the end of the day the three guys in the car that killed Mandy-- first the back seat guy, then the twin brother in the passenger seat, then the other twin who was the driver.

All of them lied like rugs; the driver was most sophisticated. The prosecution had a fairly easy time making them look not very credible.

The defense attorney tried mostly in vain to liken Mandy's entering the intersection to a kid darting out unexpectedly between two parked cars, to make it seem like she'd threaded dangerously between standing vehicles to enter the intersection, to make a case that she'd "timed the light", and to make a case that she hit the car rather than the car hitting her (all of the technical experts made him look like an idiot with this tack, but he kept with it, even pretty clearly declaring that all of the technical experts were dishonest in his closing arguments.


The judge saw through all the BS I think, but in the end upheld all the charges except the willful negligence (or whatever it's called exactly) which is the only one that could have resulted in jail time.

The driver was sentenced with fines totaling 9 hundred and something, and was given the option to do bicycle related community service (64 hours) which he accepted, so no fines. Also supervision for I don't know how long.

The defendants and their families bolted immediately on the elevator so that the victim's family wouldn't seem them celebrating. Guessing they were coached to do so. I witnessed a major round of high-fiving among the 3 occupants as I was leaving.

I probably left enough out that this whole account makes no sense. Clarifying questions welcome.
Mandy's fiancee provided the judge with a contact to set the community service up.

Mandy had the right of way-- witnesses (except the driver and his brother and friend) were all sure she proceeded on a green light. The defense attorney also tried to leverage the fact that she was the first of the Armitage traffic participants to enter the intersection.

Joe TV said:
So bicycle related community service, huh? I wonder what that is. Who had the right of way? I'm not familiar with this case - thanks for the debrief.

J.
thanks Howard for attending and writing up the summary. I am interested to see how these things play out. I hope this never happens to a chainlinker; but I know better (taken way too many stats classes).

I think it is great you cared enough to spend time - maybe one day this could happen to a close friend
of one of us and we will be there in the 'friends and family' section and are able to (hopefully) make a difference in the 'justice' system.

Dan

H3N3 said:
Well, I'll lay out a basic framework at least, I'm trashed.

The trial was a bench trial, arguments presented only to a judge (I think the defendant waived the jury trial). Took place in traffic court, which is purportedly an unusual place for such a trial (there's a lot about this stuff I don't understand).

The thing went from about 9:30 all the way to 7 PM. About 2/3 of the room was full with Mandy's friends and family.

The charges were speeding, failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident, willful negligence . . . blanking on the other two.

Early on the prosecution presented witnesses including a guy who chased the perp down and was probably the only reason it didn't end up being an unsolved hit-and-run. He was an absolute angel.
Then a gal who was waiting at the light eastbound, basically watching the whole thing happen from a box seat. She was an angel too. Would like to hug both of them.

Then a bunch of police 'experts', mostly being asked stoopid-azz questions by the defense attorney who looked like a complete fool trying to discredit them.

Then at the end of the day the three guys in the car that killed Mandy-- first the back seat guy, then the twin brother in the passenger seat, then the other twin who was the driver.

All of them lied like rugs; the driver was most sophisticated. The prosecution had a fairly easy time making them look not very credible.

The defense attorney tried mostly in vain to liken Mandy's entering the intersection to a kid darting out unexpectedly between two parked cars, to make it seem like she'd threaded dangerously between standing vehicles to enter the intersection, to make a case that she'd "timed the light", and to make a case that she hit the car rather than the car hitting her (all of the technical experts made him look like an idiot with this tack, but he kept with it, even pretty clearly declaring that all of the technical experts were dishonest in his closing arguments.


The judge saw through all the BS I think, but in the end upheld all the charges except the willful negligence (or whatever it's called exactly) which is the only one that could have resulted in jail time.

The driver was sentenced with fines totaling 9 hundred and something, and was given the option to do bicycle related community service (64 hours) which he accepted, so no fines. Also supervision for I don't know how long.

The defendants and their families bolted immediately on the elevator so that the victim's family wouldn't seem them celebrating. Guessing they were coached to do so. I witnessed a major round of high-fiving among the 3 occupants as I was leaving.

I probably left enough out that this whole account makes no sense. Clarifying questions welcome.

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service