http://www.cjonline.com/news/local/2009-07-01/carle_dont_call_witnesses

You know I wouldn’t have believed it if i hadn’t read it myself. For those who weren’t already aware of the Judd case they are learning what happened on Tuesday March 18th, 2008.

Here’s a quick rundown from what we know according to police reports:

4 off duty police officers, after a day of St. Patrick’s celebrations (according to testimony by a member of their own party) walked down the street to confront a neighbor for their partying. Words were exchanged, and after being told to leave the property a fight broke out on the neighbors property. Jason Judd, who was carrying his sidearm (which is against policy according to police personnel manual) then shot two of the individuals.

For many of those who are well aware of this incident, many are learning of the twists and turns regarding the case. For example, the Topeka Capital Journal reported that off duty police officer Jason Judd did not take a blood test to determine his alcohol level until sometime between 9am – 12pm THE NEXT DAY. A time span of possibly 9 hours after the altercation took place. For anyone who understands metabolism, it seems an awfully long time to wait to correctly determine Judd’s alcohol level from the night before.

Another twist came when Johnson County DA’s special prosecutor Cindi Carle decided the Topeka DA’s office did not have probable cause to prosecute Jason Judd and company. This decision was announced despite the fact that Judd and company confessed to have been partying and drinking according to police reports, trespassed on another’s property and shot his neighbors.

Nancy Parrish, the judge presiding over this case didnt buy this and ordered an evidentiary hearing to determine the merits of the case and whether it should go to trial.

Now, Special Prosecutor Carle believes that witnesses to the Judd incident shouldn’t give their personal testimony at the upcoming evidentiary hearing on July 2nd. Thats right!

The only individuals who were there that night, who know what actually happened that night and Carle thinks that it wouldn’t be a good idea to hear both sides of the story.

What is she thinkin? Doesn’t she understand that we all want the truth!

FAST FORWARD JUST A FEW HOUR LATER…

Judge Parish sets Carle straight when she ruled that witnesses to the night in question should be allowed to give their side of the story. CRAZY HUH?

http://www.cjonline.com/news/local/2009-07-01/judge_witnesses_can_testify#new

No, not really. Just plain ‘ol common sense. Seems that everyone under the stars thinks getting to the truth would be a good idea. The defense agrees. Judge Nancy Parrish agrees. Topeka Capital Journal readers agree. TCJ Editorial Board agrees. Our readers all agree.

Only Special Prosecutor Carle and a few individuals out there think its not worth it to get to the truth.

Why is that? any ideas?

Share this: Twitter

Facebook

Reddit

Like this: Like Loading... Related