Aurora movie theater shooting day 47: Defense to show video of James Holmes in custody
Day 47 in the Aurora movie theater shooting trial – People vs. James Eagan Holmes. Today, the defense plans to show video of Holmes in custody. During the course of the trial, prosecutors will argue that Holmes, the admitted gunman, was sane when he went into the midnight premiere of the Dark Knight Rises in an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater and opened fire on the audience, killing 12 and wounding 70. His defense attorneys will try to spare Holmes’ life by arguing that he was insane. 7NEWS and TheDenverChannel.com will have gavel to gavel coverage of the trial starting at 8:15 a.m. (MST) everyday and ending around 5:30 p.m. (MST) Watch new live video on our YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/7NewsDenver/live Additional resources:LIVE VIDEO & BLOG: http://bit.ly/theatertrialTIMELINE of the case: http://bit.ly/theatertimelineJURY PROFILE: http://bit.ly/theaterjury CONTINUING COVERAGE: http://bit.ly/theatercoverage
@ Flip, YOu know as well as I do its a done deal. insane or sane is what it boils down to.
by NT87/10/2015 8:37:23 PM
Let it go @ PA Watcher -- it's not sinking in with them.
by Rob7/10/2015 8:37:32 PM
NT8...what he said was exactly what I typed...go back, plz, and listen to it again.
by PA Watcher7/10/2015 8:37:34 PM
@Rob...no truer words... :)
by PA Watcher7/10/2015 8:41:05 PM
NT8, I think you may have misunderstood. He was offering a scenario and saying that IF - IF - he i is found guilty of anything, THEN NGRI or NG are off the table and don't matter. That's what I heard.
by Tammy Garrison7/10/2015 8:41:16 PM
@NT8 And death penalty or not, yes?
by Clancy7/10/2015 8:41:17 PM
So does he get another Public Defender to do an appeal?
by happy7/10/2015 8:41:18 PM
OMG Nelson.... let it go...
by LG7/10/2015 8:41:19 PM
@PA NG is off the table. Dream all you want, Argue all you want, With all due respect it will come done to sane or insane, The DT never tried to say he was elsewhere. or denied he did it.
by NT87/10/2015 8:41:21 PM
I love all the legalee's on this blog!
by Marti7/10/2015 8:41:53 PM
by Tammy Garrison7/10/2015 8:49:16 PM
So if the not guilty isn't followed by "by reasons of insanity" is she afraid that the jury is going to find him guilty? Does she think the jury is really going to think the choices are guilty or not-guilty-and-walks-away?
by NH7/10/2015 8:49:20 PM
Love it or leave it, this is America and EVERYONE has the constitutional right to a fair trial. It's not like he's going to walk down the street ever again. The prosecution better make sure they don't trample all over JH rights so we get a mistrial. Wouldn't that suck.....*cough*OJSimpson*cough*
by Me7/10/2015 8:49:27 PM
The "law" on the jury instructions is much clearer than the "law" on verdict forms. A lot more leeway and finesses usually involved with verdict forms in CO.
by Rob7/10/2015 8:49:37 PM
IMHO NGBRI is not off the table, However NG is gone. The DT never tried to evade it.
by NT87/10/2015 8:49:43 PM
@NT8--yes, I get it. Holmes has two chances for a straight "not guilty" verdict: Slim and none. And when I say "slim", I really mean "none" for that word, too. So, he has two chances--none and none. But the law does not allow someone to be put on trial without a possible verdict of "not guilty". The insanity defense does not change the authority the jury has, to find him "not guilty" if, for some reason, they are unanimously delusional. PA Watcher had this stuff right weeks ago, when no one was paying attention. And it has been confirmed several times today during the courtroom discussion.
by flip7/10/2015 8:49:47 PM
@Mr. D I don't think they have been finalized yet so Anica I don't think has access to share them :)
by LG7/10/2015 8:49:52 PM
@happy...as far as an appeal...he will be represented by a public defender but one that is a specialist in appeals....these guys are trial specialists such as it was
by PA Watcher7/10/2015 8:49:57 PM
Are there any published documents since June 22? ie Defense exhibits
by Brian Rinck7/10/2015 8:49:59 PM
As I said earlier, I think it's going to be guilty and the sentence will be life without parole, even though I believe the death penalty is warranted in this case, even though I am not really a proponent of the death penalty.
by Tammy Garrison7/10/2015 8:50:03 PM
Seems like Nelson is trying to get the jury to hear the words Not Guilty as many times as possible or NGRI as many times as possible.
by ad hoc7/10/2015 8:50:08 PM
NT8--It is fair to say that your and my sentiments about Holmes and ultimate justice in this case are the about the same. But, even though we may have eventually arrived at the same destination, I'm pretty sure we didn't take the same bus to get there.
by flip7/10/2015 8:50:28 PM
I think what some are missing here is the ongoing instruction by Judge Samour that the statements made by Holmes to the doctors can only be used to determine if he was or was not legally insane...they are not admissions by him that he did it (even though they really are) and they cannot be used as such...it is a difficult concept to grasp but Holmes did not admit shooting these people for the purposes of guilt or innocence...weird but true
by PA Watcher7/10/2015 8:50:46 PM
The duration of insanity is not relevant - only the issue of sanity at the time of the crime.
by anica.padilla7/10/2015 8:53:00 PM
There is no "temporary insanity" ruling in Colorado.
by anica.padilla7/10/2015 8:53:56 PM
The lawyers for James Holmes have admitted he killed 12 people and wounded dozens more at an Aurora movie theater last summer, but they say he was "in the throes of a psychotic episode" at the time.
by LG7/10/2015 8:58:30 PM
Just to Explain my sance, Not trying to attack any of you with opposing views, I do enjoy the dialog. However after 47 days of this, the DT never once tried to say he was NG.
by NT87/10/2015 8:58:36 PM
Can't see where this argument is helping her.
by Tammy Garrison7/10/2015 8:58:37 PM
And your case only "proved" he was insane after the commission of the acts.......kinda the pot calling the kettle black eh?
by Stephany7/10/2015 8:58:46 PM
The United States needs the SAME laws and court proceedings in every state.
by @Me7/10/2015 8:58:48 PM
@NT* they said he was not guilty every day. Said he did not satisfy the mens rea element of the crime and therefore, was not guilty (and not criminally responsible).
by Rob7/10/2015 9:02:23 PM
@rob, and you would be wrong. Show me one example where the DT said he was NG.
by NT87/10/2015 9:04:06 PM
I have been gone all day, just tuning in now and reading the blog posts. So there was no rebuttal?
by BernerMom7/10/2015 9:05:08 PM
Denied premediatation -- not guilty of 1st degree.
by Rob7/10/2015 9:05:12 PM
Nelson just like to argue - that is why she became an attorney.
by Suzanne7/10/2015 9:05:14 PM
Okay, let me try it this way...let's assume the PT proved that Holmes was sane...that is only one element of the offense...now they have to prove he went into the theater and shot 90 people...how do we prove that...we show he drove there, that he dressed in his costume, that he entered the theater and pulled the trigger...now for whatever reason, let's assume that the PT did not prove that the guns used in the theater were the ones Holmes bought in May, June and July 2012...he is LEGALLY NOT GUILTY. Now reverse it...change to the PT failed to prove sanity so he is legally insane...but the PT failed to prove he owned the guns...he is still NG and walks...think of NGBRI as an umbrella insurance policy that comes into play if he did everything they said he did...hope that is clearer than mud.
by PA Watcher7/10/2015 9:05:20 PM
as far as I am concerned the detail planning is proof he was not insane....but for me the telling sign of his state of mind is when he took the vicaden (sp) for pain that he might endure if he was shot.that to me is very present state of mind....looking out for #1 that is of right mind....hope the jury doesn't overlook such a small piece of evidence.
by A.L.7/10/2015 9:05:23 PM
im glad they got let out early phew
by yolo7/10/2015 9:06:13 PM
@Rob...weren't you the one that told me to give it up LOL
by PA Watcher7/10/2015 9:06:18 PM
@ PA the bait looked so tempting.
by Rob7/10/2015 9:08:58 PM
There are a lot of comments about appellate attorneys. The defendant is entitled to an attorney through the state; however, a private attorney could provide a defense pro bono, if they so choose and are accepted by the defendant.
by BernerMom7/10/2015 9:08:59 PM
This defense attorney is nuts with her requests. She's asking things that aren't allowed within the laws of the State or Country. Does she really think these requests would fly?
by Marsha Laurienti7/10/2015 9:26:48 PM
@Me...we are a Constitutional Republic and States are free to have whatever legal system they want so long as the meet, at least, the dictates of the US Constitution...
by PA Watcher7/10/2015 9:26:52 PM
@Tammy--you may be right, although I do think he deserves a death penalty for what he did. If he gets life without parole, to be served in a state prison, that might considerably shorten his miserable life anyway. Not exactly the same circs, but remember what happened to Jeffrey Dahmer in prison? Beaten to death by another lifer who, ironically, also appeared to believe he would increase his self-worth by snuffing Dahmer.