Sunday, October 9, 2016

WDT: Thousands Spent on Outside Help in Losing Courtroom Effort

     A major trial is always expensive and normally no one would add up all the ancillary costs. However, the Hillary murder trial is different because of the controversy swirling around DA Mary Rain and her need for so much outside help pursuiing a case hat ultimately led to acquittal.
      The Big County has cash flow problems that recently led to more borrowing, so paying a DA $3500  a week and then having other people paid to come in and handle much of the duties may upset some people.
    The other argument is trials like this are complicated and the expertise of others may be needed.


Anonymous said...

There was no expertise needed a moron could have done as much as Fitzpatrick did.. If he was asked to help why couldnt he have just simply advised Rain not to proceed. He should have, but whether or not he did will not be known.
Ms Duve spearheaded the initial investigation but certainly knew better than to proceed without some kind of evidence not just someones theory.
I dont blame Duve but she certainly was mis-guided by the local police on issues especially the lack of any investigation of Deputy Jones.This mother was obviously scared beyond belief at Mr Jones at one time.. While a video seems to put Jones elsewhere at the estimated time of the murder he should have been a key suspect and not allowed to be involved whatsoever in any of the investigation.
I just think this DA we have was so intent on prosecuting and possibly getting a conviction through another DAs expertise just to forfill an empty promise that she made publicaly three years ago in order to win an election.
The people of Potsdam especially the family of this young man should protest daily in front of the courthouse for her to do something about finding the real killer. Anything less would be an insult to this memory of this young man..

Anonymous said...

How much time and Money has Perrykos spent trying to defame and smear the DA in the big county?

Anonymous said...

Investigations by public officials, enforcement and agencies should be circumspect at all times-not simply engaged in "building the case for who they accuse or decide is guilty". When Child abuse is committed, this should lead to an arrest and investigation, not just a "decision" by an agency". The home intrusion without a warrant seems to violate the Constitution, especially if abuse is NOT happening at the moment a CPS worker arrives at a home.
Without a warrant, police cannot enter a residence or business unless suspected criminal activity is happening at the time. Not so with Child Protective workers. Adult protective workers are barred from entering a home without a court order to investigate abuse, despite possible impairment of individuals.