IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Any word on the Larkin hearing
dejahthoris78
post Dec 7 2015, 01:04 PM
Post #1


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 25-May 12
Member No.: 1,176



I can't find anything on the Larkin hearing. I know the original judge recused himself and Neary is off the case. The hearing was a couple days ago. Why the news blackout?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Southsider2k12
post Dec 8 2015, 08:56 AM
Post #2


Spends WAY too much time at CBTL
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,413
Joined: 8-December 06
From: Michigan City, IN
Member No.: 2



I haven't seen anything.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mike D
post Dec 9 2015, 04:54 PM
Post #3


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 72
Joined: 17-November 15
Member No.: 1,457



see my post on page 3 of fatal shooting

court date set for 10 December 2015 - judge alevizos

Larkin case file
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tim
post Dec 10 2015, 03:24 PM
Post #4


Really Comfortable
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,829
Joined: 11-January 07
From: Kobe, Japan
Member No.: 18



QUOTE(Mike D @ Dec 9 2015, 04:54 PM) *

see my post on page 3 of fatal shooting

court date set for 10 December 2015 - judge alevizos

Larkin case file


Where is the post you speak of?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Disappointed
post Dec 11 2015, 06:48 AM
Post #5


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 28-March 14
Member No.: 1,327



The hearing was yesterday looks like the new trial date won't be until at least June. So we play the waiting game still, some day justice will be served.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mike D
post Dec 11 2015, 12:59 PM
Post #6


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 72
Joined: 17-November 15
Member No.: 1,457



The case file is here, but it was not updated from the hearing yesterday.

Larkin Manslaughter Case File

Here is the appellate court hearing on the last motion for the case to go t trial in Laporte County

Larkin v Indiana, appeal decision on laporte county

The next hearing is scheduled for 8 January on a motion to change venues b/c defendant says he can't possibly get a fair hearing in this county and that Judge Alevizos has conflict. There are also some items about what the special prosecutor can and cannot see, and since he is a bit new ro the proceedings, these are to be discussed. The County actually did not want to set a court date until some of these issues are resolved (Espar is not handling the case). But the court date is likely to be in July.

I would remind our readers that the THRID anniversary of Stacy's death is today. Stacey was a mom, daughter, a sister, a niece, and aunt, a neighbor, a member of a church, and fatally, a wife. She had many friends. Her mom moved to Michigan City to help her with her children for nine years. Seven members of her family were in the audience yesterday, including her mom who has suffered so much and is now confined to a wheelchair. Her mom has not seen her grandchildren for over two and half years, through court order of the guardianship which appointed the defendant's sister who has prohibited the children from seeing any of Stacey's family. Stacey's family simply did not have the money or energy to fight the defendant on guardianship, but why should they have had to? Think of the hypocrisy. The collateral damage is unimaginable. Stacey's family has been on hold, postponing vacations, explaining to children, making 90 minute trips to wait and wait and wait some more.

The court proceedings were as expected - slow, methodical, nonsensical to the common man. But Judge Alevizos, who had a doctor's appointment to go to, did mention that he thought that if he carried the motion no judge anywhere would be able to hear a case, let alone this one in Laporte County with all the foibles of the Long Beach police and the prosecutor's office. The last motion itself didn't get to the Judge for 2 weeks, which the Judge blamed on the clerk with mutterings about its general operation. But he did set 8 January to decide.

The family did agree to the special prosecutor, even though Espar might have gotten a few votes based on the slow justice for Stacy - and a few other things (given the very small "actual" electorate). Believing in the process is one way to draw energy.

I didn't see the ND story today but their reporter was there. The defendant took lots of time talking to her - probably 30 minutes - so let's see the quote she prints. Or if she prints anything about Stacey's family. The defendant's father was present, sat in a neutral spot, and read the newspaper most of the time. Several court "people" were there - mostly standing or sitting - with no apparent function - just tax payer dollars rolling along. The court room itself is magnificent, but the room may be changed in an effort to move the process along in a now empty-defunct court room directly below the third floor circuit court.

The whole situation is so thoroughly sad, yet the feelings are there - just right at the surface - no matter how much time or (government) dust settles over it. People who know - from all of our neighborhoods - also remember and believe...that the right thing may still be done.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mike D
post Dec 12 2015, 01:00 PM
Post #7


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 72
Joined: 17-November 15
Member No.: 1,457



QUOTE(Mike D @ Dec 11 2015, 12:59 PM) *

The case file is here, but it was not updated from the hearing yesterday.

Larkin Manslaughter Case File

Here is the appellate court hearing on the last motion for the case to go t trial in Laporte County

Larkin v Indiana, appeal decision on laporte county

The next hearing is scheduled for 8 January on a motion to change venues b/c defendant says he can't possibly get a fair hearing in this county and that Judge Alevizos has conflict. There are also some items about what the special prosecutor can and cannot see, and since he is a bit new ro the proceedings, these are to be discussed. The County actually did not want to set a court date until some of these issues are resolved (Espar is not handling the case). But the court date is likely to be in July.

I would remind our readers that the THRID anniversary of Stacy's death is today. Stacey was a mom, daughter, a sister, a niece, and aunt, a neighbor, a member of a church, and fatally, a wife. She had many friends. Her mom moved to Michigan City to help her with her children for nine years. Seven members of her family were in the audience yesterday, including her mom who has suffered so much and is now confined to a wheelchair. Her mom has not seen her grandchildren for over two and half years, through court order of the guardianship which appointed the defendant's sister who has prohibited the children from seeing any of Stacey's family. Stacey's family simply did not have the money or energy to fight the defendant on guardianship, but why should they have had to? Think of the hypocrisy. The collateral damage is unimaginable. Stacey's family has been on hold, postponing vacations, explaining to children, making 90 minute trips to wait and wait and wait some more.

The court proceedings were as expected - slow, methodical, nonsensical to the common man. But Judge Alevizos, who had a doctor's appointment to go to, did mention that he thought that if he carried the motion no judge anywhere would be able to hear a case, let alone this one in Laporte County with all the foibles of the Long Beach police and the prosecutor's office. The last motion itself didn't get to the Judge for 2 weeks, which the Judge blamed on the clerk with mutterings about its general operation. But he did set 8 January to decide.

The family did agree to the special prosecutor, even though Espar might have gotten a few votes based on the slow justice for Stacy - and a few other things (given the very small "actual" electorate). Believing in the process is one way to draw energy.

I didn't see the ND story today but their reporter was there. The defendant took lots of time talking to her - probably 30 minutes - so let's see the quote she prints. Or if she prints anything about Stacey's family. The defendant's father was present, sat in a neutral spot, and read the newspaper most of the time. Several court "people" were there - mostly standing or sitting - with no apparent function - just tax payer dollars rolling along. The court room itself is magnificent, but the room may be changed in an effort to move the process along in a now empty-defunct court room directly below the third floor circuit court.

The whole situation is so thoroughly sad, yet the feelings are there - just right at the surface - no matter how much time or (government) dust settles over it. People who know - from all of our neighborhoods - also remember and believe...that the right thing may still be done.


Here is the ND story

Larkin asks Judge to recuse himself


As you will read, the defendant made sure that the reporter had the right "background" material to write up, even though the federal lawsuit has yet to see the light of day and has no chance of being heard prior to the manslaughter trial and its full adjudication, i.e., either way it might not be heard. (I wonder who led her to take those quotes from...)

The judge's attitude towards the motion was pretty accurate as I also described it with a few more facts, but if it is granted, the case will need another home and it will be yet another delay. If it is not granted, the defendant is already setting up his appeal strategy - which may or may not keep him out of prison - another judge's call, but if its Alevizos, that fate is sealed. So at best - a draw. Behind the scenes and also not mentioned, the key decision is whether or not Judge Alevizos even contacts Judge Lang, but the lawyer did ask if she was still in the area. Hard to tell as Judge Lang has been rejected by the voters and yet had a stake in the case. No worries =- the defendant is likely to challenge her, too.

As predicted, the reporter made no mention of Stacey's family, and leaves the victim unable to defend herself against the charges - which is exactly the way the defendant wants it. The reporter, Ms. Kelley Smith, didn't even mention who the petitioners were (Stacey's brother and sister-in-law, who have young children of their own). Here is the guardianship case information:

Guardianship for Dorothy Carroll for Larkin children
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Disappointed
post Dec 14 2015, 06:53 AM
Post #8


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 28-March 14
Member No.: 1,327



QUOTE(Mike D @ Dec 12 2015, 01:00 PM) *

Here is the ND story

Larkin asks Judge to recuse himself
As you will read, the defendant made sure that the reporter had the right "background" material to write up, even though the federal lawsuit has yet to see the light of day and has no chance of being heard prior to the manslaughter trial and its full adjudication, i.e., either way it might not be heard. (I wonder who led her to take those quotes from...)

The judge's attitude towards the motion was pretty accurate as I also described it with a few more facts, but if it is granted, the case will need another home and it will be yet another delay. If it is not granted, the defendant is already setting up his appeal strategy - which may or may not keep him out of prison - another judge's call, but if its Alevizos, that fate is sealed. So at best - a draw. Behind the scenes and also not mentioned, the key decision is whether or not Judge Alevizos even contacts Judge Lang, but the lawyer did ask if she was still in the area. Hard to tell as Judge Lang has been rejected by the voters and yet had a stake in the case. No worries =- the defendant is likely to challenge her, too.

As predicted, the reporter made no mention of Stacey's family, and leaves the victim unable to defend herself against the charges - which is exactly the way the defendant wants it. The reporter, Ms. Kelley Smith, didn't even mention who the petitioners were (Stacey's brother and sister-in-law, who have young children of their own). Here is the guardianship case information:

Guardianship for Dorothy Carroll for Larkin children

Very well stated Mike D glad someone is following this closely.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Aunt
post Jan 6 2016, 09:23 AM
Post #9


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 6-January 16
Member No.: 1,462



For all of you who are following this case Judge Alevizos has removed himself from the trial case yet another set back. The January 8 hering has been cancelled. Thank you all who support and continue to pray for Stacey's family
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Aunt
post Jan 21 2016, 03:28 PM
Post #10


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 6-January 16
Member No.: 1,462



Yet another set back, Judge Greta Friedman, Declined appointment of Special Judge and refers matter back to the Clerk of Court for appointment of Special Judge, to try the Larkin case, she has been selected to oversee the Guardianship case for Larkin's sister Dorothy Carroll, I believe Judge Friedman, and Judge Thomas Alevizos believe that Larkin's defense council may try for a mistrial as they claim biased.

The newly appointed Judge is Superior court Judge Richard Stalbrink, Keep the prayer chain going for a trial date to be set and Larkin's people cannot come up with an excuse to have the Judge removed. This needs to be tried and his ass locked up already

God Bless you all supporting Stacey's memory and her family
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Matthew 5:4
post Feb 11 2016, 01:06 PM
Post #11


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 15-January 16
Member No.: 1,465



I am confused. Has anyone heard why another judge (number 6) recuse themselves from this case?
Please keep Stacey and her family in your prayers. I can't imagine what her Mother, brother and close family members are going through.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Disappointed
post Feb 12 2016, 08:24 AM
Post #12


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 28-March 14
Member No.: 1,327



QUOTE(Matthew 5:4 @ Feb 11 2016, 01:06 PM) *

I am confused. Has anyone heard why another judge (number 6) recuse themselves from this case?
Please keep Stacey and her family in your prayers. I can't imagine what her Mother, brother and close family members are going through.

I know that her Mother ,Brother, and all the family is disgused by on how long this has taken. But they want justice brought to this SOB. Hopefully now that a new Judge from different county is asked to take case she will and we get something going.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mike D
post Feb 12 2016, 03:51 PM
Post #13


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 72
Joined: 17-November 15
Member No.: 1,457



QUOTE(Matthew 5:4 @ Feb 11 2016, 01:06 PM) *

I am confused. Has anyone heard why another judge (number 6) recuse themselves from this case?
Please keep Stacey and her family in your prayers. I can't imagine what her Mother, brother and close family members are going through.


Money and power. if you look over the recordLarkin Court (felony manslaughter), you'll see, everything here is perfectly legal. It's textbook how you delay a case. Quiet frankly, if it wasn't so diabolical it would be magnificent. All aspects (evidence, tertiary cases like guardianship, et al.) are done perfectly to delay the proceedings. That's your system at work.

RE: Judges - again, if you voted republican and tossed out all county judges and lawyers, congrats! you now can tell yourself that there is no difference between the two parties in terms of the judiciary. Going on hating one party or the other all you like - it makes no difference - the system is completely warped. The Laporte County judiciary system is spineless - they won't take it b/c they might actually have to take a stance. Sure they've rubbed elbows with Larkin (LBCC, ABA events, local government stuff, real estate deals), but take him on in court for a felony? No way - effectively "peeing" on your shoes, and we can't have that! What gets me is that Porter County will take this thing, no one will care over there, the judge will not be in a good mood to do it b/c its something she just has to do. Let's see if ND even shows up since it will be 10 miles away. And will Porter bill Laporte for this? Yes.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Disappointed
post Feb 16 2016, 07:05 AM
Post #14


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 28-March 14
Member No.: 1,327



QUOTE(Mike D @ Feb 12 2016, 03:51 PM) *

Money and power. if you look over the recordLarkin Court (felony manslaughter), you'll see, everything here is perfectly legal. It's textbook how you delay a case. Quiet frankly, if it wasn't so diabolical it would be magnificent. All aspects (evidence, tertiary cases like guardianship, et al.) are done perfectly to delay the proceedings. That's your system at work.

RE: Judges - again, if you voted republican and tossed out all county judges and lawyers, congrats! you now can tell yourself that there is no difference between the two parties in terms of the judiciary. Going on hating one party or the other all you like - it makes no difference - the system is completely warped. The Laporte County judiciary system is spineless - they won't take it b/c they might actually have to take a stance. Sure they've rubbed elbows with Larkin (LBCC, ABA events, local government stuff, real estate deals), but take him on in court for a felony? No way - effectively "peeing" on your shoes, and we can't have that! What gets me is that Porter County will take this thing, no one will care over there, the judge will not be in a good mood to do it b/c its something she just has to do. Let's see if ND even shows up since it will be 10 miles away. And will Porter bill Laporte for this? Yes.

From what I heard the case will stay in Laporte county,I would like to know what kind of pull or influence the Larkin family has,they are no one special as far as I know, big deal you have or had a sucessful realty business big deal !.Once again I guess like you said rubbing elbows with the right people and you think you are royalty NOT !!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Disappointed
post Feb 25 2016, 11:51 AM
Post #15


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 28-March 14
Member No.: 1,327



QUOTE(Disappointed @ Feb 16 2016, 07:05 AM) *

From what I heard the case will stay in Laporte county,I would like to know what kind of pull or influence the Larkin family has,they are no one special as far as I know, big deal you have or had a sucessful realty business big deal !.Once again I guess like you said rubbing elbows with the right people and you think you are royalty NOT !!

Looks like another Judge assigned to case now Judge from Pulaski county, according to what I know looks like this is the 8th judge. Enough is enough hopefully this one takes it and it can get some speed going on the process. I don't know about anyone else but people are getting upset about this whole disaster.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Aunt
post Feb 25 2016, 02:53 PM
Post #16


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 6-January 16
Member No.: 1,462



Yes Judge from Porter County recused herself, now onto Judge from Pulaski county, starting to look like spin the wheel and see who the arrow lands on and see if the family wins a judge of the month

Stacey is in our prayers and thoughts everyday may her soul be able to rest in peace one day
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Disappointed
post Mar 10 2016, 12:01 PM
Post #17


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 28-March 14
Member No.: 1,327



Well it looks like the case has a Judge finally assigned to it, Judge Patrick Blankenship out of Pulaski County, let's hope Stacey's family can finally get some justice served to the SOB.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Disappointed
post Apr 1 2016, 06:44 AM
Post #18


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 28-March 14
Member No.: 1,327



From what I heard it looks like there is another status hearing in Pulaski county on April 7th. Hopefully a trial date may be set ??? We will see.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Michael
post Apr 7 2016, 08:10 AM
Post #19


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 7-April 16
Member No.: 1,473



QUOTE(Disappointed @ Apr 1 2016, 07:44 AM) *

From what I heard it looks like there is another status hearing in Pulaski county on April 7th. Hopefully a trial date may be set ??? We will see.


The weasel just filed a Rule 4© motion asking for the case to be dismissed because he did not receive a speedy trial. After his attorneys have dragged this thing out, it is beyond belief that they would file such a motion!

Maybe the next tactic will be to convince the judge that he was put in the unfortunate position of having to care for 4 motherless kids and that he would be their best role model. In addition to his other guns, he owned an assault rifle for god's sake!!!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Disappointed
post Apr 8 2016, 09:44 AM
Post #20


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 28-March 14
Member No.: 1,327



QUOTE(Michael @ Apr 7 2016, 09:10 AM) *

The weasel just filed a Rule 4© motion asking for the case to be dismissed because he did not receive a speedy trial. After his attorneys have dragged this thing out, it is beyond belief that they would file such a motion!

Maybe the next tactic will be to convince the judge that he was put in the unfortunate position of having to care for 4 motherless kids and that he would be their best role model. In addition to his other guns, he owned an assault rifle for god's sake!!!

It is a sick feeling knowing that this POS,could possibly walk away with murder. I hope the Judge rules in favor of Stacey and her family to continue to a jury trial. Two people walk into a closet and only 1 comes out IT IS MURDER !!!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 08:44 AM

Skin Designed By: neo at www.neonetweb.com