Denise Lunsford, James Fields' Defense Attorney

Tyrone White · December 4th, 2018

So I just happened to Google her name, trying to get some sense of her competence, and quickly discovered she has a lot of controversy associated with her career. Here's just one example:

http://www.nbc29.com/story/23530369/...-photo-scandal

Quote:

Earlier this month, Lunsford filed for a protective order, in Missouri, against her former lover, David Cosgrove claiming that he had posted nude and semi-nude pictures of her on the Internet and that in doing so he identified her both personally and professionally.

And this isn't all. There's another negative story I read about her a few days ago, the details of which escape me atm. I'll find and post that when I have more time.

Tyrone White · December 4th, 2018

https://www.cbs19news.com/content/ne...472247493.html

"Mark Weiner filed his suit in federal court last July, alleging that former Commonwealth's Attorney Denise Lunsford prosecuted him for a 2012 abduction even after evidence suggested his innocence."

The story is too long and convoluted to describe in a post. I read a few articles on the situation and long story short, the accused seems undeniably innocent, and the "victim" is a drugged-out nutter with a history of making false allegations.

Now Denise Lunsford is Field's attorney and I wonder if she intends to deliver a conviction to the prosecution as a way to atone for her previous history.

I'm REAL interested in reading her opening statement at Fields' trial, as that indicates whether or not she intends to fully-pursue a self-defense claim, or not. If she doesn't, Fields is as good as convicted.

In Texas law, in order to claim self-defense you have to "allocute", meaning you have to admit "Yes, that was me in that Dodge Charger." and "Yes, I drove the Dodge Charger of Peace into that crowd of innocent and peaceful Dindus, and here's why I did it."

The primary point on the allocution is that if the Jury does not believe that self-defense was justified, you've just confessed to the crime you're accused of committing, and a conviction is guaranteed. There's no third alternative. Also there's no way to appeal. You've confessed. So it's critical to know if the Defense Attorney intends to use self-defense. She'd need to say it early, in order to prepare the Jury to listen to the testimony of the witnesses with an ear for anything that supports the self-defense theory.

If she failed to spell out the self-defense case in her opening statement, it means the Jury won't be listening for testimony that supports it while it's happening.

Another question is what level of access the Jury will have to the transcripts of the trial. In some cases, the only access a Jury has is a very narrowly defined section of a specific witnesses testimony, which must be negotiated between the Prosecutor, the Defense Attorney and the Judge. The request must come in writing, and sometimes the Jury does not get a written transcript, they have the specific section read to them by the Clerk.

Meaning that, if the Jurors did not notice certain critical testimony enough to ask for it specifically during their deliberations, they'll render their verdict in total ignorance of it's existance.

It's one of the ways in which a corrupt court (Prosecutor, Judge and Defense Attorney) manufacture a "Guilty" verdict, while appearing blameless themselves.

So, the Opening Statement is critical. My question is whether or not it's been made available to the Public.

Hugo Böse · December 13th, 2018

She had to be incredibly incompetent to have gotten her client such an absolutely terrible verdict.

Did Field´s mother hire her?

Jeffrey Smither · December 16th, 2018

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugo Böse

She had to be incredibly incompetent to have gotten her client such an absolutely terrible verdict.

Did Field´s mother hire her?

This is Virginia, after all. If this happened in Missouri he might have had a chance to get off the hook. MO self defense laws for example are better than VA. VA technically has no castle law to protect you in your car.

December 13th, 2018	#3
Hugo Böse Jeunesse Dorée Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Four Seasons Jalalabad Posts: 9,750	She had to be incredibly incompetent to have gotten her client such an absolutely terrible verdict. Did Field´s mother hire her? __________________ _______ Political correctness is an intellectual gulag.

Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

December 4th, 2018	#2
Tyrone White Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2018 Location: South Texas Posts: 50	https://www.cbs19news.com/content/ne...472247493.html "Mark Weiner filed his suit in federal court last July, alleging that former Commonwealth's Attorney Denise Lunsford prosecuted him for a 2012 abduction even after evidence suggested his innocence." The story is too long and convoluted to describe in a post. I read a few articles on the situation and long story short, the accused seems undeniably innocent, and the "victim" is a drugged-out nutter with a history of making false allegations. Now Denise Lunsford is Field's attorney and I wonder if she intends to deliver a conviction to the prosecution as a way to atone for her previous history. I'm REAL interested in reading her opening statement at Fields' trial, as that indicates whether or not she intends to fully-pursue a self-defense claim, or not. If she doesn't, Fields is as good as convicted. In Texas law, in order to claim self-defense you have to "allocute", meaning you have to admit "Yes, that was me in that Dodge Charger." and "Yes, I drove the Dodge Charger of Peace into that crowd of innocent and peaceful Dindus, and here's why I did it." The primary point on the allocution is that if the Jury does not believe that self-defense was justified, you've just confessed to the crime you're accused of committing, and a conviction is guaranteed. There's no third alternative. Also there's no way to appeal. You've confessed. So it's critical to know if the Defense Attorney intends to use self-defense. She'd need to say it early, in order to prepare the Jury to listen to the testimony of the witnesses with an ear for anything that supports the self-defense theory. If she failed to spell out the self-defense case in her opening statement, it means the Jury won't be listening for testimony that supports it while it's happening. Another question is what level of access the Jury will have to the transcripts of the trial. In some cases, the only access a Jury has is a very narrowly defined section of a specific witnesses testimony, which must be negotiated between the Prosecutor, the Defense Attorney and the Judge. The request must come in writing, and sometimes the Jury does not get a written transcript, they have the specific section read to them by the Clerk. Meaning that, if the Jurors did not notice certain critical testimony enough to ask for it specifically during their deliberations, they'll render their verdict in total ignorance of it's existance. It's one of the ways in which a corrupt court (Prosecutor, Judge and Defense Attorney) manufacture a "Guilty" verdict, while appearing blameless themselves. So, the Opening Statement is critical. My question is whether or not it's been made available to the Public.