Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
City by the Lake.org, The Voice of Michigan City, Indiana _ City Talk _ Any word on the Larkin hearing
Posted by: dejahthoris78 Dec 7 2015, 01:04 PM
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?
Posted by: Southsider2k12 Dec 8 2015, 08:56 AM
I haven't seen anything.
Posted by: 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
Posted by: Tim Dec 10 2015, 03:24 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?
Posted by: Disappointed Dec 11 2015, 06:48 AM
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.
Posted by: Mike D Dec 11 2015, 12:59 PM
The case file is here, but it was not updated from the hearing yesterday.
https://mycase.in.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=12750930
Here is the appellate court hearing on the last motion for the case to go t trial in Laporte County
http://law.justia.com/cases/indiana/court-of-appeals/2015/46a05-1411-cr-550.html
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.
Posted by: Mike D Dec 12 2015, 01:00 PM
The case file is here, but it was not updated from the hearing yesterday.
https://mycase.in.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=12750930
Here is the appellate court hearing on the last motion for the case to go t trial in Laporte County
http://law.justia.com/cases/indiana/court-of-appeals/2015/46a05-1411-cr-550.html
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
http://www.thenewsdispatch.com/news/article_ee0a2674-a04e-11e5-9c27-f7d46d902273.html
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:
https://mycase.in.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=12779220
Posted by: Disappointed Dec 14 2015, 06:53 AM
Here is the ND story
http://www.thenewsdispatch.com/news/article_ee0a2674-a04e-11e5-9c27-f7d46d902273.html
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:
https://mycase.in.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=12779220
Very well stated Mike D glad someone is following this closely.
Posted by: The Aunt Jan 6 2016, 09:23 AM
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
Posted by: The Aunt Jan 21 2016, 03:28 PM
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
Posted by: 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.
Posted by: Disappointed Feb 12 2016, 08:24 AM
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.
Posted by: Mike D Feb 12 2016, 03:51 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 recordhttps://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#/vw/CaseSummary/eyJ2Ijp7IkNhc2VUb2tlbiI6Ik56UXlOREF3TmpFek1USXdPakF6T1RBMU56SXhObVU9In19, 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.
Posted by: Disappointed Feb 16 2016, 07:05 AM
Money and power. if you look over the recordhttps://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#/vw/CaseSummary/eyJ2Ijp7IkNhc2VUb2tlbiI6Ik56UXlOREF3TmpFek1USXdPakF6T1RBMU56SXhObVU9In19, 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 !!
Posted by: Disappointed Feb 25 2016, 11:51 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.
Posted by: The Aunt Feb 25 2016, 02:53 PM
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
Posted by: Disappointed Mar 10 2016, 12:01 PM
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.
Posted by: Disappointed Apr 1 2016, 06:44 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.
Posted by: Michael Apr 7 2016, 08:10 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!!!
Posted by: Disappointed Apr 8 2016, 09:44 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 !!!
Posted by: The Aunt Apr 9 2016, 02:17 PM
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 !!!
This is absolutely sickening, if he walks away I just hope he knows God has plans for him and he has a place in HELL
Posted by: Disappointed Apr 19 2016, 09:01 AM
As far as I know there has been no decision yet on if the SOB ,goes to trial or it gets dismissed. I hope the Jugde is going to make the right choice and make him stand trial.
Posted by: Equalizer666 Apr 19 2016, 02:41 PM
As far as I know there has been no decision yet on if the SOB ,goes to trial or it gets dismissed. I hope the Jugde is going to make the right choice and make him stand trial.
Does anyone know how much insurance he had on our angel's life? Was it over 1.5 million dollars? Does anyone know if that insurance claim has been settled? Was there maybe a "No Fault" policy set up by the "Insurance Broker" for a substantial windfall? Perhaps in trust for the kids with a "trustee" that has access to the funds. I would love to know the answers to these questions. If anywhere close to the truth, it would seem so devious that all wives should be nervous.
Posted by: Disappointed Apr 21 2016, 08:15 AM
Does anyone know how much insurance he had on our angel's life? Was it over 1.5 million dollars? Does anyone know if that insurance claim has been settled? Was there maybe a "No Fault" policy set up by the "Insurance Broker" for a substantial windfall? Perhaps in trust for the kids with a "trustee" that has access to the funds. I would love to know the answers to these questions. If anywhere close to the truth, it would seem so devious that all wives should be nervous.
I know that it was close to 1.5 million and yes it was paid out to the children in a trust,there is a bank controlling most of the funds,some of the other is being invested on be half of the kids by a family trustee. I do not know how the policy was set up but who knows. You know he was involved in insurance business ?
Posted by: Franklin Apr 22 2016, 10:27 AM
I know that it was close to 1.5 million and yes it was paid out to the children in a trust,there is a bank controlling most of the funds,some of the other is being invested on be half of the kids by a family trustee. I do not know how the policy was set up but who knows. You know he was involved in insurance business ?
I think there was a pretrial hearing yesterday, 4/21. Does anyone know what the results were?
Posted by: Disappointed Apr 25 2016, 06:00 AM
I think there was a pretrial hearing yesterday, 4/21. Does anyone know what the results were?
It was rescheduled for May 3rd is what I heard.
Posted by: Disappointed May 4 2016, 05:30 AM
Ok here is an update from what I know on the case there were quite of few motions filed and gone over, there will be another attorney only meeting in Pulaski county court on May 11th. This is to go over any evidence that should or should not be allowed and also to go over the witness lists both attorney's have.
Then there is another pre-trial hearing scheduled for June 3rd in Pulaski county at 11:00 am there time.
There is still a chance this SOB can walk to due his attorneys saying his civil rights were violated.
As of now jury trial is scheduled to start June 20th in the Laporte county courts.
And here's a good one for you the SOB attorneys asked the Judge to ease his ban on travel restrictions so he can go see his mother in Grand Beach LOL we all know he has been going there for a long time what a joke.
I knew Stacey really well and I am close with the family, I know they can use anyone's support and if your voices could be heard. I think if anyone could support them in any of the court's it would be greatly appreciated.
Posted by: The Aunt May 4 2016, 10:13 AM
I know that it was close to 1.5 million and yes it was paid out to the children in a trust,there is a bank controlling most of the funds,some of the other is being invested on be half of the kids by a family trustee. I do not know how the policy was set up but who knows. You know he was involved in insurance business ?
So the financial estate given back to his ding bat sister Dorothy. And the other account to his other sister Ann " for investment purposes ". The ass has the kids, the money and now may walk free, Stacey's family gets no justice not only lost Stacey, and the children were instructed to not trust her family making them look like the bad people, haven't they suffered enough time
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)