Lacy's Critics!

Progress in case doesn't dissuade Lacy critics
Length of time before indictments had many criticizing DA
By Vanessa Miller
Wednesday, May 9, 2007

National media outlets were quick to criticize Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy when — like the JonBenet Ramsey homicide — a chance for charges in the death of a 10-week-old Louisville infant seemed to be fading with the passing time.

Now that Alex Midyette, 27, and Molly Midyette, 28, have been arrested, critics are still hesitant to praise the embattled district attorney.

"It's not vindication for Mary Lacy when the people she's decided did this heinous killing were on the streets for months," said Denver lawyer and legal analyst Dan Caplis. "But as a parent and someone who follows the legal system, I'm happy about the arrest."

A grand jury indicted the Midyettes on Tuesday in connection with their infant's March 2006 death. Their 8-pound baby, Jason Midyette, died with 28 broken bones in various stages of healing.

Lacy has faced much criticism in the past year.

She was chastised after arresting John Mark Karr in August for the unsolved killing of 6-year-old JonBenetand then letting him go when DNA tests cleared him in the homicide.

When reporters, bloggers and Internet sleuths caught wind of the Midyette death — which the Boulder County Coroner's Office ruled a homicide — Lacy again faced harsh criticism for not making any arrests.

Fox News personalities Bill O'Reilly and Greta Van Susteren ripped Lacy for her treatment of the case, news hounds mocked county authorities and radio shows reproved the district attorney's work.

Caplis has said on his KHOW radio talk show that the Midyette name seemed in danger of joining Ramsey on the list of unsolved homicides in Boulder County. Even Tuesday, before the arrests were made public, Caplis had a doctor on his program commenting that Lacy has dropped the ball by not taking action in the case.

"The fact that there's an arrest is great news," Caplis said. "But the question is why did that not occur a long time ago?"

He said he wants to hear why the two suspects aren't facing first-degree murder charges.

Molly Midyette was arrested on suspicion of three charges, and Alex Midyette faces four, including child abuse resulting in death.

Defense attorney Larry Pozner, a legal analyst who's not involved in the case, said he wants to know what new information the grand jury learned that Lacy and her investigators didn't already know.

"Mary Lacy is not afraid to charge people with a crime — if she could have, she would have," Pozner said. "Something has to be missing, because I don't think the grand jury has outsmarted Lacy and her detectives."

Pozner said he's not critical of Lacy. Although a grand jury has indicted the Midyettes, Pozner's skeptical that they'll be found guilty in court.

"A grand jury will indict a ham sandwich," he said. "But a defendant has no rights with a grand jury to present their case."

As to comments that it's about time an arrest was made in the case, Pozner responded, "It's never the right time to charge the wrong person."

Lacy wouldn't comment much about the case Tuesday, saying only that she's thankful for the time and efforts of the grand jurors and detectives, including those with the Louisville Police Department and her office.

"Because today's events initiate the trial process, my office will be making only limited statements about this case in order not to prejudice the trial," Lacy said in a written statement.

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2007/may/09/despite-indictments-critics-still-skeptical/

 

hahaha

I too want to know what the grand jury found that Lacy didn't know before?

When is the election there or how much time does she have left? Seems she is only popular with the rich, no?

 

Pozner should be spelled POSner! How dare he defend Lacy's blatent incompetence and disregard for the victim. Lacy's "not afraid to afraid to charge people with a crime"? Don't make me laugh.

 

I posted what O'Reilly said in his Talking Points on the other thread. He said Lacy is incompetent.

Also, someone from Boulder posted at the Daily Camera that Lacy's husband is the president of the local Boulder bank that ole man Midyette uses. They suggested that rather than indicting from her office, she used the Grand Jury to do this because of this possible conflict of interest.

 

Pozner is an azz!!!!

I love Caplis, he never fails to take her to task!

 

As to comments that it's about time an arrest was made in the case, Pozner responded, "It's never the right time to charge the wrong person."

:wtf:

Who is the wrong person he speaks of??? The baby was in the care of NO ONE ELSE besides his parents. He died of SEVERE CHILD ABUSE. Who is the wrong person to arrest? I think Granddaddy Midyette should be arrested too, and that wouldn't be the Mythical Wrong Person to arrest.

What an azz. How can these words even issue from a sane person's mouth...Oh, that's right, this guy is in Colorado, probably close enough for The Boulder Effect to take hold of him. Kiss the rich people's anuses, and they will help you in your career.
:rage:

 

Pozner defended the Ramseys for years on TV. Same old chit.

So...I GUESS HE'S SAYING THE INTRUDER STRUCK AGAIN?

:floor:

Some people are so dumb, they were born to be LAWYERS. Pozner: :weaklink:

 

if

If grand juries can indict a ham sandwich, how come the Ramseys were'nt indicted?

 

Larry Pozner has been around as a "talking head" lawyer forever. He never saw an accussed that was guilty. Same as some "talking head" prosecutors who never saw an accussed that was innocent. It's Pozner's snotty attitude that bugs me...

 

His cheap toupee bugs me.

 

Defense attorney Larry Pozner, a legal analyst who's not involved in the case, said he wants to know what new information the grand jury learned that Lacy and her investigators didn't already know.

"Mary Lacy is not afraid to charge people with a crime — if she could have, she would have," Pozner said. "Something has to be missing, because I don't think the grand jury has outsmarted Lacy and her detectives."

Leave it up to Lazy to have the grand jury do her 'work'. Yeah something is missing....a brain for Lacy!

If it's true Lazy has some connection to the Midyettes...thus...her passing the buck to the grand jury ONLY after public outrage....then it explains Lazy's actions.

She doesn't want to upset her future 'meal ticket' rich friends and business partners. She won't be DA forever...already looking ahead. One thing is consistant with Mary, she's always looking out for number one...herself! To heck with an innocent victim who spent their entire life on earth in misery and tortured by Lacy's friends' kid.

Lacy is scared chitless to charge RICH people with any crime....their attorneys frighten her...she doesn't want to face them in court!

 

She should recuse her office immediately from prosecuting the Midyettes and ask for a special prosecutor. Her husband's ties to the family are enough to insure that the Midyettes won't do any jail time.

If she won't recuse herself, then she still needs to appoint a special prosecutor. Or someone does.

 

I am sure some folks testified before the grand jury that were scared to tell the cops what they knew for fear of reprisal from the Midyette family. Of course, now that the defense has the transcripts of the grand jury proceedings, I imagine those folks are nervous.

Did the parents testify?

 

I definitely have a new favorite writer to add to my list

 

It really seems like people are finally getting to the root of the problem with what happens in Boulder....The Enabler Weeds.

Little

 

:dammit: :dammit: :dammit:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5531663,00.html

Can SOMEONE PLEASE explain the difference between the Midyette case and this one? The wording is almost EXACTLY the same!

 

My sentiments exactly.

 

About $50 million.

 

I thought justice was supposed to be colour, race, gender and wallet blind.

As cliched as it is justice needs not only to BE done, but to be SEEN to be done.

If I were the despicable carers of Chandler I would appeal citing the precedent set by Lacy in the Midyette case. Or claiming bias as they are poor and not in any relationship with the DA.

 

:floor: :floor: :floor:

"Supposed to be" maybe..."really is" - NEVER.