Updated Thursdays

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

SPM Responds (Part 8.d)


Criminal Trial
(Court Transcripts Volume 15 of 31 pgs.48-54)

Judge: Does the Defense have anything else on this issue?

Chip: Just a little bit, Judge. I would ask Ms. Andrews a question - - just for the record, not in front of the jury. I’d like to supplement the record with what we talked about earlier.

D.A. Andrews: Am I under oath? Am I testifying, what?

Judge: You are an officer of the court.

D.A. Andrews: All right.

Chip: Yesterday afternoon per the Court’s conversation, Ms. Andrews and I had a conversation; is that right?

D.A. Andrews: Yes.

Chip: I called you a little after 4:00 and I was actually on hold and you said that you were just about to call me, right?

D.A. Andrews: Right.

Chip: Because you had just spoken to (Jane Doe).

D.A. Andrews: Within an hour, yes.

Chip: And (Jane Doe) - - you had asked the question - - you represented to me you had asked the question of (Jane Doe) had she seen “Scary Movie,” correct?

D.A. Andrews: Yes.

Chip: And her answer to you was, yes?

D.A. Andrews: Yes.

Chip: That’s all I have, Judge.

Judge: All right. Is there anything you want to add to the record, Ms. Andrews, or not?

D.A. Andrews: No.

Judge: Okay. So, the Defense is offering Defense 7 and what says the State?

D.A. Andrews: The same objection as before. I think only the part that this child actually watched would be relevant.

Judge: All right.

Chip: May I briefly respond?

Judge: Yes.

Chip: Your Honor, first of all, taking (Mary Doe’s) testimony at face value, which I’ve struggled with greatly and I’ll address that very briefly in a minute.

     The first 30 minutes of this movie, with the summary that I’ll be glad to provide the Court and the State, is full of very explicit sexual acts. In fact, the acts of oral sex – if the Court remembers watching the movie, the timing, I’ll be glad to give the exact times – have been repeated a few times by then. 


     More importantly, it does not strain at all this Court’s sense of reason to realize what’s happening here. We had an understanding yesterday that Ms. Andrews, who as I said in the Court’s presence I trusted to ask the question and deliver the answer that the child gave, and she did.

     It was unequivocal, yes. There was not, “Yes, but I didn’t see all of the movie.” And I trust exactly what Ms. Andrews has told this Court today. This is what she told me yesterday was the girl’s answer. Today the girl says her answer was, “Yes, but I didn’t see it all.” This is obviously a product of coaching on either her mother’s behalf or someone’s behalf because what happened was, Judge, after these movies were delivered, everybody found out what was in this movie – all of us that hadn’t seen it – and to say it is graphically sexual is an understatement, as this court is now very well aware.

     It’s extremely obvious with the inconsistencies in (Mary Doe’s) recall, that what is going on here is an attempt to obscure from the jury what should properly be before them. As this court very astutely pointed out yesterday when the objection was made by Ms. Oncken to, “Well, we don’t know if she’s seen the whole movie or what she’s seen.”

     It defies logic to assume when someone answers as she did with me on the stand and as she did with Ms. Andrews when asked the pointblank question that, yes, you’ve seen the movie. That’s the entire movie.

     Their argument goes more to weight. They’re perfectly entitled to do exactly what they just did, Judge, to offer either this young girl or her mother to make the point to the jury that they didn’t see this whole movie.

     And I think it’s obvious to this Court and all of its intuitive power with what you’ve seen going on here, that this entire movie should be played and their objection is not as to admissibility. It’s not legally sufficient. And this Court should not grant it as to relevance, certainly.

     It goes more to the weight of this evidence and they’re free and able – they’ve just proven they’re free and able to put their spin or explanation on it. But to backtrack and allow for this more than suspicious – I don’t believe in coincidences, Judge, -- I don’t believe in coincidences. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that we’ve had a turnabout since 4:00 o’clock yesterday when Ms. Andrews and I spoke and she related the truth to me, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. She asked this girl the pointblank question. The girl said, yes, with no qualms, none.

     I think it is manifestly unjust to not play this video in its entirety to the jury as it is legally relevant. And the objection the State makes only goes to the weight, not admissibility, Your Honor.

D.A. Andrews: Judge, may I respond?

Judge: Okay.

D.A. Andrews: First of all, I think the Court in its own wisdom and common sense – I can tell you that we – I also did not ask the follow-up question not realizing at that moment, “Did you watch the whole thing?” She’s a ten-year-old child. You know how they answer questions. You see it all the time. And a lot of times if you don’t specifically ask the question they don’t volunteer the information. I did not realize until after I talked to her mother, you know, did y’all watch “Scary Movie”, and she volunteers the information. It’s just how it came about. 

     I don’t think that this is relevant in the part that the child did not watch. I don’t see how that is any way relevant and I don’t see how they have established any foundation for offering the jury – I mean, if that be the case, then why don’t we offer every rated R movie because she might have seen those since she can’t remember titles.



---

I’m going to interrupt Andrews to make a few points. First of all, the woman should’ve kept her mouth shut because everyone knows she’s in the middle of another low-down deed. But she decides to exploit the fact that the judge has a ten-year-old daughter of his own. That’s why she’s saying things like, “…the Court in its own wisdom” and “You know how they answer questions. You see it all the time.” She’s comparing Jane Doe to the Judge’s daughter to stab at his soft spot. It’s nauseating, but there’s no bottom to where these people will go. 




 Her biggest mistake, though, is how she puts herself in this plot. Listen to her last words, before I interrupted: “…since she can’t remember titles.”
     I want you to think about those words because nowhere in the transcripts, up to this point, does it say or suggest anything about Jane Doe not being able to remember titles. What Andrews did was, absent-mindedly, give us a piece of how they convinced the child that she only saw a part of the movie. 

     “No, Jane, you’re not remembering your titles correctly. You saw all of ‘Scary Movie Two’, not ‘Scary Movie One.’ Of Part One, you only saw about five minutes, remember?”
     “I think so.”

     “Good.”

I’ll continue from where I left off.
---

Criminal Trial
(Court Transcripts Volume 15 of 31 pgs. 54-56)

D.A. Andews: I mean, I think it’s just getting too far afield at that point. Certainly, you know, the one she’s seen, the Defense has argued they’re relevant and the Court has allowed that evidence in. But the part that she hasn’t seen I don’t believe are relevant.

Chip: Very briefly, tort, Your Honor. Ms. Andrews makes a point. This young girl has obviously been talked to. She’s obviously been coached. She can be led to say just about anything you want her to say. She’s a very intelligent young lady for ten years old. Especially when the question is asked unequivocally, the answer is given unequivocally. 

     The Court’s statement yesterday when we visited, “This is exactly right. It runs against common sense to suggest when I say I’ve seen a movie, I haven’t seen the movie.”

     Furthermore, one other very, very critical point that Ms. Andrews makes, we’re not offering the laundry list of movies. We’re offering the identifiable movies that we know have been seen for the specific purpose of supporting our theory that this girl did not get this idea of a sexual molestation from Carlos Coy from the act. She got it from a lot of different sources.

     And to prevent the jury from seeing this is really to hide the jury’s eyes from what is relevant and admitted exposure on the facts of this girl, Judge.

     I don’t think it at all should cause this Court any hesitation, that Ms. Andrews reported the answer that I thought we got from the stand. That’s what this whole circus became about is I made a representation to this Court that I was confident she had seen “Scary Movie” and that’s the question that she was answering.

     And I think to backtrack from that right now is to allow post - - activities to invade what the jury should have seen and keep them from seeing very relevant and probative evidence.

Judge: Anything else?

Chip: No, sir.

Judge: All right. I think this Court is required to make its decision based on fact rather than innuendoes. Having said that, I believe the jury is entitled to see the portion of the movie that the child saw. I believe that will be defined by the child herself.

     So, we need to put in - - and for purposes of the record - - that sorry movie and let her watch it until she tells us that that was the part that was cut off, whenever that is. And then whatever portion that is will be recorded in terms of figuring out where that is and I’m going to require that whatever the portion is that that be recorded on another tape so that there is no possibility that the jury, in it’s deliberations or otherwise, might view the balance of the tape which was not viewed by the child.

     In order to accomplish that, since I don’t have any video equipment, I’m going to request that the D.A.’s office, since they’re in this building, and since Gary Johnson has the equipment to accomplish this, who is an employee of the D.A.’s office, I’m going to request that the D.A.’s office accomplish that mission.



---

The judge is so confident that the child is going to stop the movie at around five minutes, that he’s already assigned a man, Gary Johnson, to record that short piece.

     He thinks he’s just fucking over us again, totally ignoring all that Chip said. He mentions that he’s required to make his decision based on fact not innuendos, but the fact is that Jane Doe said she watched the movie. 

     While he’s making arrangements to record this piece of the movie, Chip makes a heads-up request to keep anyone from telling the Child’s family about what’s about to happen. Being more than alert, Chip realized the possibility of Jane Doe actually believing she was telling the truth.





---
Criminal Trial
(Court Transcripts Volume 15 of 31 pgs. 58-59)

Judge: All right, since she’s already down here and I want to accomplish this today as opposed to disrupting tomorrow, my suggestion is when the jury finishes watching the first movie, then we can put on testimony to clarify the admission of the portion of – well, actually, in order to do that we need to get the tape itself. We need to have whatever we’re going to admit.

Chip: We have their copy.

Judge: But I mean the redacted portion is what I’m talking about.
 Do we have any other video machines besides the one that they’re looking at?


Bailiff: I can get one.

Judge: Can you round one up for us?

Bailiff: Yes, sir.

Chip: In the interim, Your Honor, I would ask the Court, in an abundance of caution, to not allow anybody to have contact or explain other than this Court what’s about to happen.

Judge: That’s fine.

---

Chip made sure the D.A.’s didn’t get a chance to talk to the family before the viewing of the movie, which was a brilliant move. But isn’t it sad how he had to guard them from even speaking to this family? Is it not sad what these people could do with just a few minutes behind closed doors?
    
     Before the girl comes in to watch the movie, let me verify what I said earlier, about the judge having a daughter the same age as Jane Doe. Next page:
---

Criminal Trial
(Court Transcripts Volume 15 of 31 pgs. 60-61)

Judge: …My instruction being to basically watch the movie until – up to the portion that you saw and to notify the Court when that portion ends. And then, obviously, if that is less than thirty minutes, if the Defense wants to offer additional information for purposes of the record, we can do that.
     And wherever we are – because one of the things about ten-year-olds that I have found from my own ten-year-old is the estimates of time are not very accurate. So, we’ll find out what she sees. It may be 30 minutes. It may be five minutes. And then we’ll take it from there. Okay?
---

On the next page, Jane Doe comes in to view the movie.

Continued in part 8.e

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

Where's Our Dear Family And Cold 40 Incandesio ? /:
Disappointed/: please post it soon . . .

Anonymous said...

Incandesio please find.footage of the trial ! :) . i remember the thing that affected carlos was his demeanor to the judge and jury. he seemed like he didnt care he was badly dresses and showed no respect. couldnt help but think it affected him.baby bash & others were in the courthouse including the late great pimp.c. But could you ask him why he didnt respond or.show no emotion when judge ellis read his sentence to him? & why he took the stand against his attorneys will. also could u please ask him about lil bing.thats all thank you gor typing this..peace one love girl.

Anonymous said...

^ this is more important.. so wait patiently for your cold 40's




The more I read about this case, the angrier I get at that judge and the girls family.

Incandesio said...

Anon 11:14:
It's in the filing cabinet, safe and sound.

Seriously though, I'm sorry you're disappointed. It's important to me to get Coy's words out there, in orderly and readable pieces. I can't neglect the letters to Pat Lykos, and I have to make room for everything. This is 4 of 5 parts, and after that will be the new 'Dear Family' letter.

Please bear with me a little while longer, and take a minute to read his entire analysis so far; it's important.

Incandesio said...

Anon 11:58:

Judge Ellis didn't allow cameras during the trial..Does anyone out there know if the verdict or sentencing was filmed? That would be interesting to know...

Carlos has written a little about his demeanor in court, and how his lawyer kept telling him to pull his pants up; that's a good question to send him.

I'm going to send him all the bing comments and question when I send the last blog post, if he wants to answer he will. Thanks for reading, and commenting!

Unknown said...

Isn't their suppose to be a Dear Family letter.

Incandesio said...

Anon 12:06:
Thanks for staying focused; looking at the shit they pulled over this one piece of evidence makes me wonder what else the judge allowed them to get away with.

Unknown: Not today; it'll be posted after the last part of this letter from SPM.

Anonymous said...

^bro didnt you just read the comments it'll be posted soon...FREE SPM

Anonymous said...

Yes incandesio the verdict was filmed the judge allowed it.my mother worked in downtown in 02-03 she remembers the cameras and spotlight on spm even mtv abd bet was there. Judge ellis didnt allow caneras during cross examination and opening arguments but he allowed them during closing arguments and the verdict. could you ask arounf for them here on your blog im sure some ppl have footage ..i mean you do have alot of ppl who follow this blog.and yes i mean atleast try to look your best wheb your in court i recall him almost not caring bout the whole thing like he was on top of the world ...he was cocky but deff talented.it suprises me how he was convicted ..i beliebe hes deff innocent . He made a grave mistake wen he took the.stand...tbh no offense he made a fool of himself it affected the verdict alot. i remember him.weeping about sonething.anyways please tell him about lil bing .thanks

Incandesio said...

Anon 12:28

Thank you for bringing it to my attention! I will see what I can find, and keep y'all updated.

Anonymous said...

Nice post . this blog is in the midst of blowing up. soon youll have news cameras on your doorstep! :) and regarding the guy who commented about the news cameras. there was definately filming involved thus footage. There was one were spm was outside the courthouse and people were yelling child molester and he ignored it and said "if god wants me to endure this then i will." there was alot of people that day went coy was sentenced. one question for mrs.coy would be how and what did you do those 2 and a half months that you were in the county jail awaiting trial? . (he was in there from march of 2002 to the.verdict time of may 30 2002.)

ig said...

wow this is crazy. idk but perhaps he acted like he didn't care because he knew for a fact that he didn't do it and believed that the frauds were going to be exposed and the truth was going to set him free. why be worried or afraid if u know u didn't do any wrong?? maybe he was shocked when he received his sentence,idk. just by reading this its shocking i can't believe how they were able to do this to him, its crazy. they did him wrong lets hope he gets out. FREE SPM!!!!!

beanieman said...

It was a good move for SPMs lawyer to suggest not to tell jane doe and her mom what they were about to do, but how do we know for sure they didn't tell them? It seems like they ignored everything else his lawyer talks about. Man they fucked Los over from all angles! Even appointed a judge with a daughter the same age as jane doe. So you already know the judge is gonna try his hardest to convict SPM whether he proves his innocence or not. Personal life and opinions should not affect a trial as far as a judge is concerned. FREE SPM!!!

Anonymous said...

Should make this shit into a movie, too much drama.. I feel sad for carlos because it seem like the state never going to give him a new trial its not fair.

A187 said...

Why didn't chip say something about the d.a. using the judge's daughter as an example? I know for sure its not allowed in court. Imagine if Carlos told the jury, "put yourselves in my shoes, how you would feel after being falsely accused of an embarrassing crime you did not commit?" Bet the outcome would differ greatly.

Anonymous said...

Hey Incandesio i know this has nothing to do with this SPM case but what is your favorite SPM song. love you for this site i hope your SPM guardian angel your one of a kind.

jc said...

the thing that kinda pisses me off is the way people say SPM acted in court. i know hes innocent and he might have acted the way he did because he knew he was innocent, BUT come on man, why not help yourself a bit here. just because i know im innocent, im not going to give the judge ANY reasons to look at me like i dont give a damn about a case where supposedly a 9 year old girl got sexually molested. makes sense?

MUCH RESPECT TO INCANDESIO AND FREE THE WETBACK!!

Anonymous said...

The word would spread more if there's a movie of this non sense no crime but what the da does is ask what they wanna hear the da must be Fuck up in the head what about Jane doe medical history or back ground !!! Looks like they wanted to set him up if Jane doe saw the movie she saw the movie not just 5 min. Come on it sounds like excuse !!! O well this is bull shit and we need to get spm his Retrail so he can have a chance to proof his inocennts free spm Fuck the da

Incandesio said...

Anon 10:56:

Thank you very much!
It would be hard to pick one, it really kind of depends what mood I'm in. Two that I never skip are 'Duh Duh Duh' and 'The Beach House'.

Anonymous said...

FREE THE CRACK CHILD

Anonymous said...

incandesio...have u read this?

http://www.facebook.com/groups/196910830354908/doc/347374758641847/

its the reply from that filero guy...
i just wanted to let yall know i aint tryin to instigate anything, as a matter a fact when i read this i took it offensively and felt as if filero was telling me these things

Incandesio said...

Thanks for the link; I know people will be interested to see his reply.

Anonymous said...

My phone doesn't want to take me to the link. Can u tell what page its called so I can find it on Facebook?

Anonymous said...

^answer..
its on fileros page...you probably have to friend him, then scroll down for about a day on his timeline...

Anonymous said...

^ scratch that...your gonna have to scroll down all the way to march 28 on his timeline

Anonymous said...

Damm jaja that boy los real.. I would do the same shit if i ever ended up in a situation like that kiss ass for noone! i mean he took what he would say in songs to the heart "live like a man and ima die like one too" as in standing or dead but never on my knees this blog is crazy as heyo tho keep it up and duh duh duh good but la la la screwed up better ;D

Geovanni Mancera said...

FREE SPM AND LIL BING!! INCANDESIO THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU ARE DOING!!

Mr. topnotch said...

A person that is guilty will not go threw all this trouble. They got my dawg los, and its a dayum shame b/c there are thousands of folks fuckd by the system. Free spm, jay keep doing ur thang. And for all the spm fans please spread the word out there.nobody diserves to get thier family n like life jacked like that. Duece

Anonymous said...

What is the "Dear Family Letter"?

Anonymous said...

Incandesio are u posting a dear family letter tomorrow night?

Meskinkid said...

Incandesio, why was it that you started this.blog? about 2 years ago i remember carlos letters to the fans would go to dopespace.com now dat site is kinda dead, and i remember on one of the letters i read, carlos said he was going to post the courts transcripts to expose the bullshit that went on in court and he was going to name it spmaftermath. so my question is did spm ask you to so this or did yu start it on yur own?
And if you could can you ask spm about dopespace why is the site not updated, why is it so lonely, if the site was updated regularly or paid more attention to it would be a benefit for dope house.

Incandesio said...

I had never spoke to Carlos Coy or anyone connected with him until late last year, five or six months after the time I started writing the blog.

I also read the letter from a couple years back, where Carlos talked about starting a website where we could find the transcripts. He said they were going to use the domain name SPM IS INNOCENT .COM. I would still love to see that materialize.

Incandesio said...

Anon 12:07:

No, tomorrow is a post I wrote, Thursday will be the last part of SPM's answer.

Anonymous said...

incandesio, can you give 'los the response by filero that was posted on facefuck?? and ask him wtf?? i gotta say man, either side seems credible so i would love to hear what los says about it!! also can you ask him why dope house never dropped tbz2 and all other albums that we only heard about?

EITHER WAY, FREE LOS AND FUCK THE SYSTEM!!

Anonymous said...

also, can you ask los about HIS REAL HOOD? cuz even though im not from tx i know that reveille park, south park and hillwood are completely different hoods or projects or what ever the fuck they are and los seems to claim them all! i just want to know whats the history on this cuz a lot of people dont like los because of this!

Anonymous said...

what was filero's response to spm??? couldn't access the link.

Incandesio said...

I will send these comments to him, but I'm not going to send him Filero's letter. I sent the first article because it tied in with the angle the Houston Press has been taking on Carlos Coy's case.

Filero wrote his response on Facebook, and if he expects SPM to answer it I'm sure he's already mailed him a copy; if he hasn't, well...then he's talking about a man who can't hear or respond, which is revealing in itself.

Anonymous said...

fair enough incandesio, i know we are kind of taking a different direction as to what this blog is really about so i understand. thanks anyways and FREE SPM!!

Anonymous said...

Well said Incandesio. Fuck Filero. And disliking someone because of the hood he is from is just plain stupid. As long as he makes good music people shouldn't care what hood Spm or any other talented rapper is from. Listen to the music they are the words of a real street legend. FREE THE MEXICAN!!!!!

ese creeper said...

If you know los well atleast from what he says on his songs you know that he has love for everyone regardless of hood race or anything else. like he says his race is player he represents everyone and he is not really trying to represent a hood but everybodies hood you know. like he b giving arizona alot of love. Im from arizona so when i hear him shown mad luv I automaticly love the music. I dont like it when rappers only talk bout they hood on all they songs cause i could care less where they from. so los just has love for every hood(like he already said) Thats just what I think>