Tuesday, September 6, 2016

Long Awaited Trial Begins

       Oral "Nic" Hillary, 41,  began this news story as Oral "Nic" Hillary, 36.  The long,meandering, saga following the death of Garrett Phillips in Potsdam, finally goes to trial today.
       So much water has gone under the bridge , it's hard to remember what happened through the prism of all the events since then.
        And of course all this will be prosecuted by Mary Rain, who is in some ways on trial herself with her competency questioned by many including the SLC Legislature.
         Let the pursuit of justice begin.
http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/news05/tuesday-start-to-hillary-murder-trial-puts-restrictions-on-parking-20160906

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Case is already over.

WD Times has rendered a verdict of Reasonable Doubt - not guilty and published it in the paper.

End of story.

Anonymous said...

I thought Fitzpatrick was prosecuting him?
If not, its hard to believe a man like Fitzpatrick would have ever agreed to prosecute this case if there was no there there. If Fitzpatrick is still prosecuting, as was reported previously, then you can bet Hillary will have some trouble beating his murder rap.

Anonymous said...

"Insane" Rain is in so far over her head that she had to call in "Fitz" to bail her out - in contravention to NYS law even. (DAs can't just willy-nilly call up another DA and have them try their case). Of course, if and when this trial goes south for the prosecution, as it will, she will merely blame Fitz for the failure, not herself. Watch and see.

Anonymous said...

Justice is the first one to leave when the court room turns to a circus ring.

Too bad 7 News doesn't have Friot to make sense of the day-to-day happenings of this ring-ling saga. With all the juggling clowns and lions jumping through flaming rings we will never know what happened to poor Garrett Phillips.

Anonymous said...

9:54, You sound like a democrat judge in RINO county.
Fitzpatrick is beyond reproach. If he agreed to prosecute then it must be legal for him to do so, or he wouldn't have agreed to do so. If he agreed to prosecute, then there must be a good case, or he wouldn't have agreed to prosecute.

You can hate Mary Rain all you want, because she swigged out of a champagne bottle or whatever dummycrat reason you invent, but she was still brilliant to bring in this heavy hitter. You can pray and hope that this child murderer gets away with it, in hopes of getting a donkey back in the DA's office, but that just makes you an a-hole.

Anonymous said...

Wow.. I hope the jury potentials dont read these blogs...
First and formost Fitzpatrick was sent here by an association of DAs to help out on the trial but the basics are the DNA.. There is none...
Second as incompetant as Rain has been she didnt just call him up...
This trial should have never happened as its just a witch hunt.. The victims family should have accepted the fact that Ms. Duve was handling this race in the proper way taking what evidence they had (none) into consideration. Mary Rain ran for office on hy7pe and used these peoples emotions to win and now want to convict at any cost...
With 0 evidence and 0 witnesses working only on peoples emotions is wrong.. They feel Mr Hillary was the most likely suspect so he became the only suspect.
When Ms Cyrus lost her son i,m sure it devastated her and my sympathy to her and the rest of the family, but we cant just disregards others right and try someone on just emotions with no evidence as this case is doing..
Ms Cyrus has a lifestyle which has included many many men and still does. Why couldnt it have been the last person who d seen him alive. Mr Jones a deputy is not above suspicion in my book. Mr Jones is a known liar and is in a position as deputy to dodge scrutiny and did in my opinion. Mr Jones had a letter written about his harrassment of Ms. Cyrus to the Sheriff and the County Administrator. Mr Hillary also made complaints about Mr Jones harrassment to him .
This is a guy whos father served the Sheriffs dept honerably for several years but Mr jones himself was involved in a coverup of a DWI and leaving the scene of an accident and lying to the State Police and was forced to resign from the Sheriffs Dept years ago.
The undersheriff who just retired from the SLCSheriff office highly recommended the nonhiring of Deputy Jones because of those allegations but was ignored by the present Sheriff.

Anonymous said...

These comments help explain both why Hillary won't get a "fair trial" and why his defense team is neither asking for a change of venue or going with a bench trial. Seems like everyone (including the media) has decided the case before any evidence is presented. Extremely unlikely that there will be a unanimous jury. BTW the DA's Association didn't "send" Fitzpatrick, he volunteered after reviewing the case. He also has a Court order allowing it, as required by law.
Normally, a hung jury favors the defense, but not so sure in this case because given time, the DA can send the same incriminatory DNA sample for more tests as the science continues to develop - and might get it admitted at a second trial.

Anonymous said...

4:06 - Thanks for your entertaining analysis. First off, I truly hope the young boy's killer is found and brought to justice. That is truly the all-important matter but, unfortunately, this case was bungled by amateurs from the beginning and the truth has paid a price at the expense of his family.

However, despite your uneducated and clearly uninformed "ready, FIRE, aim" conclusion that Mr. Hillary is the "child murder," there is no direct evidence placing him at the scene of the crime - no eyewitnesses (despite the crime being committed in the late afternoon in broad daylight and within the reasonably populated Village of Potsdam) and no physical evidence whatsoever, including the whole DNA issue whereby the NY State Police's DNA experts have deemed that any intermingled trace DNA found at the scene was inconclusive. Maybe such is not the case in your world, but, for the rest of us, inconclusive fails to clear the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard necessary to convict a defendant - the same standard that even your staunch conservative judges adhere to.

I guess Mary Rain was "brilliant" by bringing in Fitz because she lacks the competence to carry out her campaign promise to prosecute Garret's killer? But then again, you have already convicted Mr. Hillary which means the case must be open and shut so why would she need to bring in an experienced "showman" DA like Fitz for such an easy trial if someone as uneducated and uninformed as you can determine Hillary is guilty before the trial has even started...unless she is that incompetent.

Contrary to your labeling, I'm actually a conservative but, unlike you, somewhat familiar with the laws of New York. I realize it might overtax your ability to read/learn but spend some time in New York State's County Law Sections 701-703 and tell me where Ms. Rain was authorized to bring in Fitz. I guess you must like the Democrat judges in the RINO county because that judge disregarded New York law to allow Fitz to prosecute this case and bail out Ms. Rain.

Finally, I could care less whether she swigged champagne from a bottle or has fired more staffers than the last three DAs combined (another sign of her wonderful management skills?), but I am amazed she is still allowed to practice law in New York State after her negligent supervision of one of her non-licensed ADA interns that tried a felony trial despite a crystal-clear prohibition from doing so. Just another ethical misstep that Ms. Rain has committed over her dubious legal "career."

I look forward to reading your post when Fitz and "Insane Rain" lose this case. As I said earlier, she will blame Fitz for the loss as she has blamed everyone else for her incompetence and shortcomings - it is never her fault. The good news is that the good people of the Big County are almost finished with her disastrous term and will hopefully elect a competent and reasonable conservative to serve as DA. The bad news is that a 12 year old boy is still dead and his killer will still be out in public when this joke of a trial concludes.

Anonymous said...

8:37, try not to be as brain dead as a democrat. The comments here are based on probability. Things like the stellar reputation, skill and record of Fitzpatrick. As well as the lies of Mary Rain's detractors. It all leads to a very likely guilty verdict. But we will still wait for the trial and the evidence before making a decision.

Anonymous said...

10:07, you are no more conservative than Obama is a conservative. You make pedantic allegations that seem highly improbable, which no one but the Bar-Association-crime-syndicate-cartel could give two shits about, even if they were true.

We have not convicted anyone. On the contrapositive, you have already declared the murderer innocent and demanded he be set free. And you hang your hat on DNA evidence, or the supposed lack there of. Gee wiz... Mattock and Jessica Fletcher never produced a single piece of DNA evidence yet they won all their cases. How could that be??? Even more mysterious, how did anyone ever get convicted prior to a few decades ago when DNA technology was invented?

Furthermore, no one ever said this was an easy case. If it was an easy case, even the patently incompetent predecessor to Rain could handled it. You know...the girl who gave us the Oxley trial there times.

Anonymous said...

8:46 - That's some entertaining prose. It seems ironic that you would write that I have "declared the murderer innocent" while you have clearly convicted him by calling him a murderer. Last time I checked, people are still innocent until proven guilty....well, except in your world of course.

I never said set him free. Somehow he was indicted....on Ms. Rain's second attempt because she botched the first indictment. There is a post-indictment process called a trial that now needs to run its course. What I said is the post-indictment process has been flawed (appointment of Fitz in contravention of NY law to bail out Ms. Rain) and that there will be a "Not Guilty" verdict at the end of the day because the lack of evidence against Mr. Hillary will leave reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors...unless the defense opts, last minute, for a bench trial. Then the judge will render a not guilty verdict, unless he dismisses the case after Fitz presents his case-in-chief.

Anonymous said...

10:40 This is not a democrat versus republican issue. The only "probability" that counts is "beyond a reasonable doubt", and the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. May be that evidence emerges at the trial, but to reach a conclusion now is fundamentally un-American. Likewise for those who have closed their minds to the real possibility that Hillary may have committed this murder.

BTW 10:07, there is a duly signed court order under County Law 703 allowing Fitzpatrick to assist in the prosecution. Also while the NYS Police Lab was unable make a conclusive determination as to the source of the mixed DNA sample, they were not certified in the use of STR-mix technology. Their tests did not exclude Hillary as a contributor, and good chance that they will be able to use the newer method in the next year

Anonymous said...

8:46, That's some entertaining prolix you string together. Yes it is ironic that I refer to the accused as a murderer. That's what makes me clever and witty, while you're dolt for keying in on it.

11:39, You don't get to rule on what counts when it come to probability. If it were your ass on trial, I bet you would think it counted for a whole ton, to know what Fitzpatrick's conviction rate is.

Yes, the guilty verdict will be based on "beyond a reasonable doubt". But thus far the only evidence I have seen, is a stellar prosecutor with a stellar record, agreeing to handle the case. That would count for something in Vegas because it is an indicator. Meanwhile we have dolts like 8:46 already declaring Hillary will not be convicted and it is beyond a reasonable doubt to think otherwise.

And yes this is a partisan topic. Marry Rain is no more inept than any of her predecessors and no more inept than our plea bargain DA here in Jefferson County. But that doesn't stop democrats and the media from criticizing Rain to a higher standard than they ever did anyone else. All because she is a Republican woman.

Anonymous said...

Little early to be playing the "woman card" - don't you think.? Thought that was part of the standard Democrat playbook. Rain will need it to combat the ethics and mismanagement claims in next year's election.
In the meantime the trial should be non-partisan, either the evidence proves Hillary is guilty or it doesn't. Rain campaigned on the issue and she got what she asked for. Fitzpatrick is a good trial prosecutor - but still needs evidence. Let's see what proof there is......

Anonymous said...

This is a really neat food fight. Here's the way it will go. Hillary is a black guy. St Lawrence county, with SLU and places like Clarkson bowing to Black Lives Matter. Therefore, there is too much guilt to convict a black guy. Facts be damned. Like OJ, he walks. All it takes is one university connected fruitcake.

Anonymous said...

Good that you can finally acknowledge that Fitzpatrick is a good trail prosecutor. Now if you could just bring yourself to admit that a good trial prosecutor would not take on a case with no chance of winning or no evidence.

Rain's campaign involved a lot of issues. But the voters picked her because the girl she replaced was ten times worse.

Its not too early to point out that one reason you and the media pick on Rain is because she is a woman who dares to be a Republican. The voters know that most of her problems were caused by democrats sabotaging her and obstructing her and one particular democrat judge was the biggest offender.

Anonymous said...

The "girl" she replaced....

Anonymous said...

Huh...a bench trial. What a surprise. Not...

Anonymous said...

Yup. Its funny. Just like "the murderer" is funny.
Not too funny in and of itself, but funny because you bite every time.