Bail hearing: Cory Batey’s attorneys went first. Three bond companies were present. Batey made bond earlier from the sale of his Grandmother’s home. Attorneys want the prior, before trial bond amounts of $350,000.00 reinstated.
Testimony from the bondsmen was that Cory Batey made and met all the bail conditions, routinely. Bail company owner, Mario Hambrick testified on behalf of his bonding company, “Free At Last.” Mentioned Nashville Bonding was also present. John Gutrie, owner of Nashville Bonding Company, was also present and testified. But Guthrie added a wrinkle. He said he did not want the bond reinstated. While not objecting to a Bond, Guthrie wanted a new process. (Mo’ money.)
Another bond guy testified. Didn’t get his name, which was good for him as he apparently didn’t know too much. (Who knew so many bond people would show up?) Ah…first mention of new charge. Third bond guy on the stand was surprised by this information.
He quickly shrugged it off as a “citation misdemeanor.” (State jumped in to say “an arrest is an arrest, and violation of bond conditions.”
State mentioned now that Cory and especially, Brandon Vandenburg, knew the likely results, they are a flight risk. New guy said he doesn’t have GPS. (Everyone seems surprised. No one more than me as I’ve been talking about GPS since 2008.)
Court asks if there’s another bonding company. No one responds.
Batey’s attorney asked for bail reduction as an “appropriate remedy for this case in light of National Bonding Company’s wish to not continue the bond.”
Judge Watkins reinstated Bond for Cory Batey at the same price. Guthrie doesn’t get any more money.
Vandenburg’s bond however, was increased by a mere 50k. Both have to wear GPS.
Vandenburg immediately began whispering with attorneys. Batey just watched.
Very surprised that the court was largely unaware of how GPS works.
Check the news clips here to see how GPS works.
A crazy coincidence
Vandenburg will return to his home in Palm Desert after being fitted for GPS. Next column with be an update of his friends; but, in a related note, former Vandenburg attorney Fletcher Long and his partner will be sententced today for Extortion.
The craziest part of the bond hearing
Update: As of 2:00p.m both Brandon Vandenburg and Cory Batey are out of jail. Oddly enough, Judge Watkins did not make as a condition of bail, that neither uses alcohol or drugs.
File that under: Stunning miss. To be fair, the DA didn’t bring it up and should have.
Given the defense was,
“Devil alcohol did this”
were I the victim I would be furious.
However, the DA missed it, at trial so,
Meanwhile, the DA will have to deal with public outrage, on top of their sloppy bond performance. However, the DA is still in the cat bird seat and will only deal with more outrage should the decision be made to work out a plea deal, rather than re-try the case.
That said, how the DA managed to botch a case with so much evidence remains a mystery.
I guess 20/20 or 48 Hours or Dateline might figure it out.
Interesting news from Nashville today from one of the jurors on the CB trial. They apparently had one juror who did not believe that it was Batey on the video and in the pictures. the other 11 jurors were ready to convict on all 7 of the original charges (similar to the last jury). As a compromise (and to avoid the possibility of a hung jury) they came to agreement on 1 of the ag rape charges and 1 of the ag sexual assault charges and then lesser convictions on the remaining charges. According to Tom Thurman, this should not alter the sentencing for CB, since Tennessee rarely gives consecutive sentences. As previous posters have stated, the sentence will probably be in the range of 20-22 years, unless Judge Watkins adds one of the lesser charges and makes them consecutive. Sentencing is set for May 20th (the same day that BV has a status update on his trial, which begins June 13th). Stay tuned for more jockeying from his defense team as they try to delay the inevitable for their client.
Appreciate your update, SA! (Was working on my just posted column and couldn’t answer right away.)
I figured someone balked on one of the counts. 🙂
Will go hunt it down.
Well said, Bonnie. Very well said.
I believe you are right on point in regards to Judge Watkins. I have been extremely impressed with his patience, demeanour and professionalism throught this entire ordeal, esppecially when dealing with Batey’s new, inexperienced attorney. He will no doubt find a middle ground, more than the minimum but less than the maximum. We can only hope the BV is watching closely, especially after the way he was portrayed in Batey’s trial.
Thanks, SA. Am guessing BV is watching closely. He’d be an idiot not to. Wait. : )
Mostly agree. However, in this case, 85% seems too low for the crime. Even less, considering time served. I can’t see Judge Watkins doing consecutive sentencing but I also believe with Cory’s history of assault, he deserves at least one consecutive sentence. Judge Watkins strikes me as a one of those rare judges who has “wisdom” so we’ll see!
I don’t think that will happen. But that’s just me.
I tend to agree, but it was surprising to hear it from Worrick Robinson as the reason for Batey’s breakdown just becore he took the stand on Friday. Do you think it is just coincidental that Judge Watkins has scheduled Batey’s sentecing and Vandenberg’s status hearing on the same day (May 20th)?
Nope. Not at all. If Vandenburg still hasn’t processed reality, on May 20th he will get a helpful assist for his attorneys to beg for a plea deal.
Since the Victim registered her opinion on the jurys verdict, she upped the ante, mightily. (And GOOD on her for doing so.)
Consecutive sentences are very unusual under TN law . A sentence of 18-22 years is probable . I have however seen cases on line where this judge has handed out consecutive sentences . But , it is not probable in this case . Youth , no prior record , established precedent in the state relative to sentencing and what appears to be a wise and fair judge . To me , it comes down to whether he will get 17-18 years or 19-22. In this state 85 percent of the time must be served in a rape case .
What i meant about the car what happened to it after bv parked it in front of the dorm? I guess he left the victim in front and then he parked and came back? I saw no video beyond the initial arrival. I guess it is not a critical detail.
Guess not. Fyi, Update on BV….his CA case concluded….got unsupervised probation for the charge he picked up in CA while out on Bail. Yeah, you read that right. : )
I never agreed that Batey was somehow less guilty or less of a monster than anyone else , including BV. People seemed to actually feel sorry for Batey .And now, my opinion has been proven correct . Batey is going to get slapped with a 20 year sentence or maybe as much as 22. Again , he was the one violating the victim over and over again. Basically , he turned into a monster for the whole 30 minutes and then calmly and arrogantly walked away as shown by the hall camera. By the way , the attempt to scare the victim by bringing in all of those Batey family members yesterday was lame .
According to Batey’s attorney, there is a good chance that the sentences will be consecutive as opposed to being served concurently. That would mean a sentence closer to 80-90 years. Look for the remaining three defendants to accept whatever plea the prosecutor offfers.
Seems we will need to wait a bit longer to reach a final conclusion in the Vanderbilt rape trial. During the status hearing held today, Judge Watkins agreed to delay the trial until March or April, 2016. He cited difficulty with jury selection during the holiday season as well as possible winter weather for the legal teams travelling from Nashville to Chattanooga for jury selection. He did deny the repeated motion from both defense attorneys to separate the trials, so at least we know that the two defendants will be tried together. The defense teams also asked for further testing of evidence (mainly the victim’s vomit and underwear) to determine if drugs were present. That tactic could actually backfire for the defense if the lab results determined that she was given a date rape drug prior to the sexual assault. Not sure what the defense team expects to gain with this additional information. The prosecutor feels that it is simply another tactic to delay the trial, yet again.
Thanks so much for the update! They still seem to be negotiating with the remaining two defendants. I personally think she was drugged. Just a gut feeling. Thanks again. Very much appreciate your tip. Will re-calendar. 🙂
Thank you both for your thoughts. On another topic, I still have the following questions:
1: Why did BV first drive to the victim’s apartment , go inside (?) and then decide to go back to the dorm?
2: Was the victim drugged?
3: Who parked the car in front of the dorm?
4: What was BV’s intent initially? Assuming the victim was not drugged, that is.
and even if she was, BV did not know any of the three other guys. He ran into them by chance. So, did they all immediately or on the way upstairs plan this or talk about it?
5: why did they leave her on the floor of the hallway at first?
6: When they went into the room, were there any real plans to assault her or just to have a few laughs , albeit in poor taste?
I heard none of this addressed in court. From this point forward , at least in the room itself, there is court documentation.
7: How could these guys, particularly BV, be of a mind to do what they did and then instantly go into cover up mode? BV knew immediately that he had a problem. Miles Finley’s first reaction was one of immediate concern, at least for BV if not the victim.
We will never get the whole story.
Also, the videos from the dorm cameras that wound up on TV; those are very damning, both before and particularly after the assault. It was clear that BV was telling all of those other guys “it wasn’t me. ” But he knew immediately that he had a problem. He could not have been that drunk. Or, he must have received replies to his video texts similar to what Miles Finely initially wrote, which was , “she’ll call rape, get out of there, you are so done,” etc.
CB was also walking normally down the hall after the assault. He did not appear drunk to me. He appeared very arrogant, like many jocks often are. People should not forget that part of it. Big time athletes can be very arrogant. I went to A Division 2 school, with no big time TV sports at all, and the athletes there were mostly very smug.
1: Supposedly, he was taking her home and she had trouble with her key. Note this is from Vandenburg as the victim has zero memory.
2: I believe the victim was drugged. No history of wild, party girl. History of girl who monitored her alcohol intake when out, and kept an eye on her drinks. Brandon bought her drinks, insisting she try a new one.
3: Brandon parked the car in front of the dorm
4: I have a problem with this question. Only Brandon knows his intent, and he’s not talking…which speaks volumes.
However, as I find the back-ended question, “assuming the victim was not drugged, that is”
to be too offensively preposterous to respond.
As for, “BV did not know any of the three other guys. He ran into them by chance. So, did they all immediately or on the way upstairs plan this or talk about it” begs another other questions.
Such as: Are you really unaware of the cloistered life jocks and frat boys enjoy? A life that is largely free of accountability? Not by coincidence, this also answers Questions 5, 6, and 7.
However, regarding your thought process and the: “Were there any real plans to assault her, or just have a few laughs, albeit in poor taste.”
The answer to that is twofold:
1. I don’t care, nor should anyone
2. The question might be okay for Dateline, but it’s irrelevant in court.
Also, by “a few laughs” – am not sure exactly what you mean. Assault-lite?
Hmmm… I get njpjm’s point about someone wrecking their own life while wrecking their victim’s life. Yes, there is such a thing as semantics – as Bonnie pointed out – just not in this case. It is easy to forget those nasty little details that clearly show a person’s true nature by showing their intent when they PLANNED the means to victimize & hurt another person, then carried out their plan without regard to the victim or any other victims swept up in the “incident” (gadfrey, I hate that word!). Yes, it is best to use words that describe such persons – sociopaths and/or psychopaths – following their convictions.
However, law enforcement should use words in the criminal statutes they are trained to enforce (to the best of my knowledge,”incident” is not found in such statutes). Journalists covering crimes should follow the same rules – they have access to criminal codes – even with the requisite “alleged” for legal protection. In any event… I think njpjm is merely trying to say that surely there must be a good guy somewhere inside these rapists… if we just look hard enough… who ruined his life & that of so many others on what, to him, was just a lark. Semantics aside, I have better words for him!
I would like to make an obvious point. It should be said anyway to clarify the record. I was saying that what the defendants’ did to ruin their lives, as well as the lives of others, has no explainable reason. I was not trying to minimize the impact to anyone, including the victim herself. I went to college myself and I saw plenty of drunken hijinks. However, I never knew anyone who would have gone to that level of depravity. So, while I would like to always give people a second chance in life (I favor the more progressive Canadian or western European criminal justice system to ours in many ways) I realize that this is the USA and ignorance of the law and the penalties involved for breaking it is no excuse. Without knowing any of the four young men involved, I will guess that they all have positive qualities and they could have been very productive contributors to our society. As a sex offender, their lives will never be normal, even if or when they leave prison.
As for a plea deal, I recall seeing a Nashville legal expert predict 18-20 years before the vacation of the conviction. So, I though that if 18-20 was likely before the reversal, 15 seemed plausible in a plea arrangement.
I have always found you to be honorable and gentlemanly. I am unable to agree with your reasoning, particularly in regard to, “no explainable reason.” Alcohol lowers inhibitions. My opinion was the victim, who monitored her drinking, was drugged. She did not remember the attack. The police told her about it. Drugged shows intent. So I am not inclined to give Brandon Vandenburg a pass at any level. As for their positive qualities, my hope is they can run reading programs in prison. Do something other than lifting weights.
Also, times change. (Mercifully). Language is important. The police often refer to a husband beating his wife, as a, “Domestic incident.” Why they would refer to an assault to attempted murder, to murder, as an “incident” is beyond me…but I am mentioning it to reporters at every turn. The police blew an opportunity to catch the Virginia Tech killers because his first two victims were male and female, so the police automatically believed it was a male-female thing, and concentrated on an ex boyfriend. The actual killer had time to go to the post office, mail a letter to the police to explain why he did it, and upload a video before returning to the campus to kill dozens more. From the Washington Post:
“Based on witness interviews, police thought it was an isolated domestic case and chose not to take any drastic campus-wide security measures, university officials said. But about 9:45 a.m., a man entered a classroom building and started walking into classrooms and shooting faculty members and students with the two handguns. Virginia Tech Police Chief Wendell Flinchum said investigators were not certain that the same man committed both shootings. But several law enforcement sources said he did.”
It got worse with the NY Times article.
” Chief Flinchum said that initially officials thought that the shooting was “domestic,” suggesting that it was between individuals who knew each other, and isolated to the dormitory. He said the campus was not shut down after the first shooting because authorities thought that the attacker may have left the campus, or even the state.
“We knew we had two people shot,” he said. “We secured the building. We secured the crime scene.” He later added: “We acted on the best information we had at the time.”
Chief Flinchum said officers initially began investigating a “person of interest” as a result of the dormitory shootings. The person, a man, was described as a friend of one of the dorm victims, but Chief Flinchum said the police had not detained him.
At 9:45, the police got another 911 call about shootings at Norris Hall, just as university officials were meeting to discuss the first shootings. “We were actually having a meeting about the earlier shootings when we learned that another shooting was under way,” Mr. Steger told reporters Monday night. By the time officers arrived, the shooting had stopped and the gunman had killed himself, the chief said.”
Therefore when it comes to language, I remain vigilant. Vigilance has no good press, because it’s tiresome. Never-the-less, this kind of sloppy thinking, and sloppy language from the police, is getting people killed. That is aside from the lack of regard for life. Usually towards women.
Speaking of women; it will be interesting to know whether the victim wants to participate in a second trial. My thinking is how the case turns, stems from that.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Thanks. Am working on a big piece for Monday. But it’s a heat wave…or what passes for a heat wave around here. 🙂
Yesterday’s news… Oct. 9, 2015
NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) –
A status hearing in the Vanderbilt rape case has been postponed.
Attorneys were supposed to gather at the Metro courthouse on Friday, but the hearing has been rescheduled for Oct. 19.
Just weeks ago, the judge decided that a jury from Chattanooga will hear the case against former football players Cory Batey and Brandon Vandenburg.
The trial is expected to begin on Nov. 30.
Read more: http://www.fox10tv.com/story/30223726/status-hearing-postponed-in-vanderbilt-rape-case#ixzz3oBtzfbgr
Checking in periodically for updates in case you were able to access information on any plea negotiations. Apparently no news yet despite shortness of time until trial.
PS: Not only is your bold feature working overtime, your ‘internal clock’ for posting comments is adrift.. or you & Njpjm couldn’t sleep last night.
I am still surprised that people think that BV should get more time than Batey relative to the incident itself . I am not speaking of the two other charges that BV received that the Batey did not . Have any of you read some of the details of the assault that was shown in court ? Batey is the one on tape assaulting the victim over and over again. The details I have read are truly disgusting .
Addition to the post:
In my view people are expressing sympathy for Batey because his mother seems nice and he has apologized publicly . Further , people dislike the Vandenberg family . And , his previous attorney was just disbarred . None of this should have any bearing on the sentence . Whatever deal is being offered should be the same for both defendants . Don’t forget that Batey was also involved in attempting to destroy evidence and lie to the police . He was not charged , but he was absolutely in on the cover -up . I don’t hate these guys . They have however ruined their own lives for nothing . There was no way to justify what they did . That is also a crime itself : the fact that they have ruined their own once promising lives .
I respect your thoughts, and completely disagree the sentences should be the same. Batey owned up, Vandenburg clammed up. Also, (for the late comers) the Some of the attorneys were disbarred because they committed the crime of extortion.
Last, vehemently disagree with your characterization of the rape as nothing, i.e. “they ruined their lives for nothing” which is wholly demeaning to the victim. Subtext: They ruined their lives for *that* If I overheard someone describing my horrific rape as “they ruined their lives for nothing” I would be 100% furious.
I know you personally feel for the victim, am just advising there is a way to phrase it that doesn’t diminish the horror of that night and the crime repeatedly visited upon her.
(P.S. My bold feature is screwed up.)
The only reason people think BV should receive more time than the other defendants is for the additional charges of tampering with evidence and unlawful photography. It does not matter what CB did during the cover up, he was not charged and therefore cannot be found guilty. The disparity in sentencing has nothing to do with his Mother or his new found religion.
Well, if by the “incident” you mean the prolonged gang-rape – – – a gang rape that was planned and facilitated by Brandon Vandenburg; along with his thoughtful, running commentary as how, to execute Brandon’s “By Invitation” multi-participant rape quest – – minus the only present and sober Vanderbilt teammate, as Mack Prioleau who upon hearing, then seeing the crime, rolled over to feign sleep for the duration of the attack, and testified he might do the same thing again (are you listening ladies)….I respectfully disagree.
While keenly aware the old saving is, “The cover-up is worse than the crime” doesn’t pertain to this woman’s sustained attack by Corey Batey; it never would have happened had not planning, facilitation, and execution by Brandon Vandenburg.
Last, I am happy for the additional, attempted obstruction of justice and tampering charges ole Brandon managed to rack up. My hope is the victim is up for the retrial, and the DA isn’t leaning on her to accept a plea.
But I suspect that is exactly what is happening.
Negotiations don’t begin with the DA making an offer – with such a strong case. Rather the defense proffers a plea deal & the DA responds. BV’s team will likely try a “No Contest” plea for 10 w/5 to serve, which the DA would properly reject out of hand. The DA would respond with ‘full confession’ is a necessary condition and if the defense won’t or can’t proffer a full confession, there simply will not be further negotiations. There it will stall until close to trial in November, when I expect anxiety will set in & the defense teams will get far more realistic about confessions in exchange for 10/5 to serve. However, the DA would likely return with 10 yrs served + 5 probation w/community service. However, on the other hand, given BV’s family, I would also not be surprised if BV et al skips the country via Mexico… again JMHO (I’m often wrong in this case, too) 🙂
Thanks for your perspective. I agree with your assessment as well as the fact that BV’s defense team will likely begin to get nervous the closer to 11/30 we get. Look for several attempts to delay the trial, similar to what Long and Herbison pulled the first time around. From what I have seen, it seems that BV’s new defense team is a bit more professional and may not put the court through some of the shenanigans that occurred during the first trial. Time will tell and it should make for an interesting case study for future law school students.
Thanks for your perspective. My feelings are with such a strong case, the DA has no reason to offer a sentence that is just a third of the jail time that the defendants would receive once convicted. If Vandenburg could get 10 years with 5 to serve, he should jump at the chance. Not really sure his Father would allow that, since no one on the defense team thinks he did anything wrong. Their defense has been that “He never even touched the girl!”. Your last statement about having them admit guilt speaks volumes. They may never admit that what they did was improper, much less against the law.
PS regarding public outrage: How quickly did the ‘public’ move on after other high-profile cases? We live in a fickle society dominated by TV, Internet and other forms of social media. Next????
I am curious to know what Moms Hugs feels would be an acceptable plea deal. I would imagine that most people would want to see significant prison time, something along the lines of 22 years for Vandenburg and 15 years for Batey. They would also be expected to admit their guilt and show signs of remorse to the victim (something only Batey has done so far). I cannot imagine the defense team agreeing to this much prison time and that is the primary reason that this will once again go to trial.
My first inclination is to cop Bonnie’s plea. ~ It’s 2 am & I’m not quite sure. 😉
I believe the DA will take the victim’s perspective in deciding to deal. She really can’t move on until it’s all over, her primary concern now may have more to do with reliving the horror again than in their prison time. And it’s not just putting her through one trial again, it involves her family, too.
Victims of any horrible crime become deflated when faced with the reality that our justice system focuses more on the criminal’s rights than on damage to their victims. It is a mighty bitter pill for victims to swallow, especially when grappling with how easily it all fell apart on one juror’s lie. At her age, she may decide she would rather put it behind her & agree to 5-10 years prison time – 10 for Vandenburg as ring-leader, 7 for Batey, 5 for banks & 2 for MacKenzie – plus 5-10 years probation with community service required.
As for the DA, he impressed me as a man of character & principle. I sincerely doubt that he is as concerned with his image at this time in his career as you might think. Nor would he be too concerned with an outraged public with its short attention span. He, too, may want to get this behind him and move on.
It goes without saying no deal without full confessions from all 4 men.
Your points are well taken, but are you SURE the DA is more interested in retrying the case than in negotiating a plea deal with Vandenburg & Batey, as well as Banks & McKenzie? Don’t you think BV’s new team is pressing that advantage to get a deal? Seems I recall the DA would not even talk about letting them plead out before trial.
The DA needs to retry it to restore image. Also, where’s the impetus to offer a deal, given the sheer volume of evidence, and Vandenburg’s family dynamic?
Last, everyone still hates the guy. That hasn’t gone away. I just can’t see a reason for the DA to deal….except to save money….which he’ll lose in bad PR.
P.S. The only way I see a deal is if the DA talks the victim out of testifying and then makes a public statement it was her wishes. In which case she is screwed, once again.
How is the DA’s image tarnished? By not flushing out Easter’s hidden wish to nail the guy? JMHO, seems to me that whole juror issue tarnished Fletcher & Perez more, especially given their stupid defense & Fletch’s behavior in court. Of course, I was wrong about the judge’s mistrial order, so what do I know! I do know mistrial = high court costs, which every court has to consider; therefore, the Chief Judge & Court Admin may be putting pressure on the DA to negotiate – not only with the 4 men charged, but also with the victim & her family. I would not want to be in the DA’s hot seat with this since it’s considered a slam dunk case! On the PR issue, I bow to your experience/expertise in that area. I would think the case’s ‘entertainment’ value is quite low by now.
In reading the local comments, area residents remain pretty unhappy by the DA’s failure to flush out Todd Easter during Voir Dire. Partly agree as these days, some investigative work on social media seems necessary before selecting a jury. Plus, doing so is pretty easy as everyone wants to air their views. As for “entertainment” level…..disagree. While the most successful movies and TV shows are about crime, and we’re endlessly fascinated by crime stories and just as importantly, how to solve them….why the case has strong legs is because people do want to feel satisfied. Thus, no justice, no satisfaction.
As for me, am wondering if privately Mack Prioleau ever penned an apology to the victim.
Kidding! I know Mack Prioleau is way too cowardly for anything remotely accountable like that. 🙂
Keep in mind that the DA, Glenn Funk has publicly stated that they intend to go to trial. There is really no need to consider a plea deal with Vandenburg and Batey. McKenzie and Banks may be a different story, depending on the outcome of the new trial. As far as the victim, I would think that the DA’s office takes her feelings into account when deciding on the appropriate course of action. Her willingness to do whatever it takes to bring these perpetrators to justice is indeed commendable. Her persistence seems to be driving the DA to do the right thing and move forward with a trial. Bonnie is right with her statement about the DA losing in the court of public opinion. There would be quite a bit of outrage if this case were settled. It would seem that the costs of the new trial would affect the defense much more than the prosecution, since all the work has been done. Even though the entertainment value is quite low, it will still be fun to watch Tom “The Terminator” Thurman in what could very well be the last trial of his career as a prosecutor.
Thanks for the extra information on Tom, “The Terminator” – hadn’t realized this will be his final one. This bit of added information (and that the victim seems fully on board) means I wonder if they’re even taking calls from the defense. 🙂 Except maybe, Corey Batey’s attorney. Worded correctly, (“It’s what Jesus would want you to do) Corey might be convinced to flip on Brandon. I would ask for assurances of being sent to another prison than Vandenburg’s. Meanwhile, I didn’t catch any order from the judge telling them not to communicate with each other, so likely Vandenburg is likely calling to keep the “Bro” code. Naturally, my hope is the DA got a wire tape. 🙂
I am curious to know what you think Corey could add as a witness that Tip McKenzie was unable to contribute when he testified. It seems that the prosecution also had Brandon Banks ready to testify, so I am not sure they would need to add Corey to the list. It also seems that Corey was the primary aggressor in the room, more than the other three. My feeling is that Corey would need to finally come clean and admit that he does remember at least some of the details of the rape and give his account of Vandenburg’s plan from the moment he arrived at Gillette dorm. Corey is the only one (so far) to show remorse and he has indeed found religion; now if he would only admit that he does indeed have some recollection of what happened in the dorm room. For me, that would go a long way in getting him some leniency at sentencing. I agree, though, that he would need a guarantee from the court that he would be sent to a different prison than Vandenburg. Otherwise, it could get ugly in a hurry.
Wishing to have a better answer than, “Am not quite sure” but sadly, that’s the only legitimate one available to me at present. I hate it when that happens. 🙂
Totally agree with you that Corey would have to come clean…once again, just like at the first trial, (and with far fewer numbers of, “I don’t recall”) than he stated at the first trial.
I agree that BV’s new team was initially hired to prepare his appeal, however, this was all done prior to the mistrial being declared. They will now have to step back and attempt to prepare a second defense to the original charges. Let’s just hope that this team can come up with more that the “campus culture” of partying and binge drinking that Fletch Long and John Herbison devised. I would imagine that the DA will once again utilize McKenzie to testify against Vandenburg and Batey, since he was the one person able to give the jury a first hand account of what happened in the dorm room. Trials for Banks and McKenzie will not even be considered until the end of the new trial for Vandenburg and Batey.
JMHO, but BV’s new team, added to whatever Perez actually did, will function as an appeal & plea bargaining team in reality. Has anyone heard even a tiny bit of rumor regarding the 2 perps who haven’t had their day in court yet – Banks & MacKenzie? Surely the DA must have something up his sleeve with which to play this “poker” game.
Yes, but keep in mind that Albert Perez is still on Vandenburg’s defense team and has been from the very beginning. There is nothing new to review, so their delay tactics are simply a way to postpone the inevitable. Look for the defense to make motions for a change in venue based on the amount of publicity the trial has generated since the verdict. We have Dr Phil and 20/20 to thank for that.
When will they announce a new trial date? I thought we would have heard something by now.
New trial is set for November 30, 2015. The way the new defense team for Brandon Vandenburg is complaining about not having enough time to prepare a defense (it has only been 2+ years since the original indictment) expect several requests for continuing the trial into 2016.
To be fair, that’s standard…given it’s a “new” case for them. And of course, there is no defense! 😂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I beg to differ on that malpractice claim – Long’s duty to his client does not hinge on one motion for a mistrial. While it would be a tough one to prove, like a lot of medical malpractice, many claims are settled by insurers for the cost of litigating it.
Legal malpractice happens when an attorney handles a case inappropriately due to a breach of duty to provide skillful and competent representation (negligence), which causes a financial loss. “An attorney must exercise the care, skill, and diligence that are commonly exercised by other attorneys in similar conditions and circumstances. It can be challenging to prove that the outcome of a legal proceeding would have been different if your attorney had acted differently.”
See: “Legal Malpractice” — https://www.justia.com/injury/legal-malpractice/
My next post on this will blow your mind. Am struggling for the title. Can’t seem to get past, “No really, I am not making this up.”
WELL… now that you have my attention!! Get on with it… LOL!!
I am not sure that the Vandenburg family has much of a malpractice claim against Fletch Long, since he was the initial attorney that filed the motion for a mistrial. Personally speaking, I think that this decision is one of the great things about out judicial system. As Judge Watkins stated, regardless of how strong the evidence against a defendant, (and the evidence in this case is about as strong as it gets) every individual that is charged with a crime has the right to a trial in front of a fair and impartial jury. Todd Easter lied to get on the jury and craved the recognition that came with being the jury foreman and reading the verdict on television. As a result, he tainted the system leaving Judge Watkins with no other choice but to declare a mistrial. I am constantly amazed by the strength of the victim as she continues to show a willingness to do whatever is necessary to ensure that these rapists ultimately receive the punishment they deserve. Stay tuned……it promises to be interesting!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree with you here, as hard as these words are to stomach. I say this because I don’t think that justice for the defendant/ criminal/ etc. should result in less “justice” for the victim and survivor. Let’s remember that 15 years has an end, while for the other side the effects of what happened that night may not have an end in sight.
Very well put. Thanks.
It gets worse. Hang on. 🙂
Good grief, no wonder people feel our legal system is totally broken. After Fletcher Long was found guilty of extortion, Judge Watkins must have felt this case was going to be overturned on grounds of inadequate counsel anyway so might as well grant a retrial & get on with it now. Meanwhile, the Vandenburg’s can get on with a malpractice claim & recoup their money from Long’s insurance company. What a clusterf…
I cannot help but think that we may never see Brandon Vandenburg again. It would not be too difficult to get him from Palm Desert over the boarder into Mexico and then proceed to Central or South America. I imagine that Papa Vandenburg has already determined where he could flee (Belize comes to mind) and not face extradition back to Nashville. The money they would give up on the bond would be a bargain compared to the cost of his legal team.
The ego of the father, the lack of impulse control of Brandon, could be. However, as for costs: Tennessee taxpayers. I wrote about Brandon being declare “indigent” a few days ago. As for Perez, the defense was so bad in the first go around, when I covered the OriginalL Verdict, “Vandenburg Verdict – Is it too soon to mention Malpractice” I asked the question if the Original Retainer Agreement included appellate costs.
Having known Brandon, I can honestly say that I TRULY believe this guy is looking to escape the sentencing. How the DA snatched defeat from the jaws of victory is a golden egg for Vandenburg, and I would personally be VERY surprised if he did not use this chance to flee the country. Batey I’m not worried about. But Vandenburg is a different kind of animal.
Was he always this creepy?
@Bonnie Can you explain how legally an “indigent” criminal/suspect/etc. able to afford $400,000 bail and retain that label?
Sure. A couple of things. Generally, Bail is ten percent of the amount. So a $400,000.00 bail is in reality, $40,000.00
Sometimes when the judge is mad, he or she can make it an “all cash” bail – which stops people from putting liens on their homes as collateral.
Also, the courts aren’t generally concerned about who pays the bail. Anyone can post bail for anyone else. The Oscar winning director Michael Moore, posted bail for the woman who brought down the Confederate Flag in Charleston, South Carolina.
Any thoughts on what a plea deal for these two might look like?
Am not getting the feeling the DA is leaning towards any kind of offer as they must redeem themselves. A lot depends on the willingness of the victim.