IPFS
John Stuart Re-Indicted for Murder
Written by Powell Gammill Subject: Arizona's Top NewsI received this from Cindy Cantrell yesterday:
John's self defense case was remanded back to the Grand Jury today. They re-indicted him for murder. The arraignment hearing is on July 24th
at 8:30. If you wish to contact me, please send an email. I am very
upset and can't take calls at this time. His attorneys say that
given all the evidence of self defense, there was no way for this to happen
unless the prosecutor once again withheld evidence. They will request the
grand jury transcripts and ask for another remand if evidence was withheld
again. Otherwise, they will set a date for trial. He will be un
bondable due to the other case of filing false paperwork that is still
unresolved at this time.
John really needs others to write to him. He has been there for three
months, and so far only received mail from me. He needs all of our help to
get through this. You can only send him a post card that has a metered
stamp. No stamps are allowed and no letters are allowed. I buy
pre-stamped post cards at the post office [Online too: (1) (2)]. The stamps are officially
copied onto the postcard itself. This is the easiest way. Otherwise
you can take your post card to the post office and ask for a metered post
mark. [Keep in mind this is SOP for people who are detained but not convicted of anything.--Powell]
John Stuart
201 S. 4th Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85003
P405881
Thanks to everyone's continued support.
Cindy
---------------------------------------------------
I am disappointed. Not surprised because of the terrible power a prosecutor has to selectively choose what a grand jury sees unless they know they can demand more, but I was optimistic. So I am now disappointed, but at least the trial moves forward to resolution.
I would be surprised if the prosecutor failed to include the 418 defense information along with and at the same time as the 404 and 405 defenses. Otherwise she would face contempt. This 418 defense was the main concern of the judge, and clearly he will allow it to figure in Stuart's trial.
As to new evidence presented, I am sure the defense submitted a pile of things to the prosecutor they were hoping she would present to the grand jury. How much of it she would be obligated to present, I do not know. Whether it would cause the judge to force it back to a third grand jury I have my doubts, since he did not consider the same lack of evidence presentation in the first remand hearing.
I am curious whether this was a new jury, or an experienced one, and how that would work out from a strategic standpoint.
Lastly, did they know Stuart was available for and desired questioning under oath?
--Powell
