💯! Her lawyer is her puppet, he’s doing everything she wanted. It won’t work though. I do agree that I’m glad she’s be represented. Lessens the appeal if SB would represent herself. Justice for Jorge! Heartbreaking 💔 Thank you Peter for yet again for breaking it down for us! 👏
The interrogation is a really powerful tool against her intended self-defense argument. The only way to establish self-defense in this case is through her own testimony--which the state could then immediately and effectively impeach via her statements in the interrogation about it being accidental.
nope, wrong, she gave them her phone IN that interrogation which means they now have ZERO evidence against her! She is walking out of jail and then she will sue the county and she will win that too.
I disagree. Rules against coercive interrogation exist to protect the innocent, which defendants must be legally presumed to be in order to protect the wrongfully accused. So if it happens, blame the cops for not following the rules.
Miranda statements are a core part of the investigation process. It is one of few legal concepts police actually have to know to do their job. It is also literally knowing when and having the discipline to read the card at the required times. If police fail to comply with very well established Miranda law, what else are they doing in blatantl disregard for rights? I'm okay with her not being convicted if they screwed up. If the police department can't be disciplined enough to handle a scene like this with strict adherence to the law and department policy, you know this is not the first time officers violated suspect's rights. The public has no practical method of determining if every suspect is treated appropriately. When we discover that violations happen they need to be dealt with.
So after she answered "yes" to understanding her rights and then proceeded to talk to them, isn't that considered implied consent? I mean, if she understands she doesn't have to talk to them but continues to talk anyhow... that's on her at that point.
I don’t think they need to legally get express consent. I would be shocked if the law required it. I think he is using the “magic words” theory of law.
@@sallycinnamon5370 I agree, they don't have to expressly state they waive their rights. Just as her conduct waived her right to a court appointed attorney, her conduct waived her Miranda Rights
Nobody who actually _understands_ their miranda rights would continue talking to the police. It's all just an end-run around the constitution anyway. What's the point of a 'right' if the cops are gonna try to schmooze and/or trick you into waiving it?
I don't know what she's complaining about. She got exactly what she wanted. Are we supposed to believe a straight A student didnt understand her miranda rights?. Sarah asked them to check her phone - they did. Sarah didn't want to be arrested in front of her son - she wasn't. I watched the interrogation of Kristie Flood earlier and she was at the station to get her phone and was arrested. So this must happen a lot?. Also if after they forensically examined her phone and found the incriminating evidence then surely they have the right to then make an arrest.
Wait, so the all knowing Grade A student of excellence that is Sara, didnt know her basic constitutional rights? It's this exact type of shit that makes everyday people like myself, really despise defense attorneys. Making mountains out of nonsense. Rights were read, twice.
You ask "What is Mr. Owens doing with his time?" In the hearing w JAC one of the attorneys said they spent a majority of time fighting with SB about what laws meant and being gaslit by her!! Hes a busy man. 😂
Owen's states in his motion that Sarah was shocked and dismayed at being arrested. She doesn't look or sound shocked and dismayed to me. Also, the day before she mentioned several times that she didn't want to be arrested in front of her son. So in my humble opinion law enforcement actually respected that and had Sarah come to them. Sarah is actually quite intelligent in some ways. She knew it was coming.
Wouldn’t she be shocked and dismayed even knowing Jorge died in the suitcase and she just went to bed to find him dead in the morning. I certainly would, but then I would know I did something really bad to a person and he died bc of it. I feel for Jorge’s family and his children.
@@noragelineau3490 Exactly! I agree with you completely. Sarah has some serious mental problems. She showed no emotion or sadness around Jorge's death. She was worried that his family would come after her. She was worried about being arrested in front of her son. She was worried about being called a drunk. She was only worried about herself. But she most definitely knew she was going to be arrested. I feel badly for Jorge's family too.
I don't think the Judge will throw the interrogation out. She was read her rights, at the end, the Detective did say to her, do you wish to talk to me and Sarah said yes. So the most important part telling her of her rights were read. The only part she didn't read was, with these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me? I get it, Owens is trying to find something, but as another person posted already. Even if I didn't see the interrogation video, those videos will send her to prison the rest of her life.
love your work, i think Owens didn't provide case law because he knows its a losing battle but his client probably insisted he do it. Why bother doing the work when you know its not going to go your way. I don't think he is a fool but he is catering to his exceptionally demanding client and merely putting on a show for her sake.
She was not concerned about the questions because she was convinced she was going to convince the police that she was innocent of international homicide.
Yes I agree I think he is just doing what she wants just to get through the trial. I doubt Owen’s personally believes that he can win this argument. He just doing it I think to shut her up 😂
If Sara was “in shock” after being arrested why did she say “ I had a sneaking suspicion this was gonna happen so I came her VOLUNTARY “. We all know Sara is forcing Owens to make these irrelevant motions . Again, she’s sabotaging her defense ! He can’t focus on real items he needs to be doing
Not everyone is a true crime junkie. I’m positive my Mom has heard it because she also watches LYK; however, I am also positive my Dad has never heard it or anything about Sarah Boone even though we all live in the same house!
@@laura7607You can definitely have heard about a case and still be on a jury. You just have to be able to set aside anything you’ve heard and rely on the evidence admitted during the trial. That’s why both sides get to ask so many questions.
Could someone spoil this for me, does it get thrown out? My heart (aka my patience 😂) can't wait 47:26 minutes to find out! Edit: I promise I will still watch the video! 😉
If Sarah fails and gets a sentence for her negligence, it will be due to her own ego that she embraced while she was questioned. An intelligent person would have kept their mouth shut, and said I want my lawyer!!
I do think the police/investigators need to read rights verbatim. It's not that hard and doesn't take that long. I think Sara understood, consented, but police need to be consistent in following protocols and held to doing so . I don't think Judge will throw it out though.
If they told Sara “come get your phone “ why was her 1st written question “am I getting my phone back today”. We all hear how Sara mistakes facts and twists the truth to benefit her
Peter you should cover OH v. Toby Madden. It’s been wild today. He shouted out to family in the court room that he was responsible for his wife’s murder and then was arguing with his attorney later on in the day.
You should know the Supreme Court if The United States of America has Miranda Rights as follows: 1. You have the right to remain silent 2. Anything you say can and will be used in court 3. You have the right to AN attorney 4. If you cannot afford AN attorney, ONE (only ONE, NOT NINE) will be appointed free of charge That’s it. This motion is bull and you know it. Very disappointing in you.
Oh but it's a slippery slope if the people's rights are whittled away. All other western crown countries legal system only the crown has rights & All people are oppressed. A wise statement better to let one guilty person go free than imprison the innocent. Sara will mess up again we all know it have a blest day 😅
but I saw that the phone was located on a hutch in the livingroom - how did Sarah get the phone? This statement can't be true, guaranteed Sarah told Owens this.
to be fair - he does have a lot to catch up on to be ready for trial. I think he is putting in effort where it might actually make a difference - just my opinion
All Miranda ensures and demands is that a suspect be informed of their rights before questioning takes place. There is nothing stating permission to continue speaking must be granted. Letter of the law, this is going nowhere.
@@wordsleuth992 Calm down, it's all going to be okay. You are correct, but that doesn't mean the video doesn't give me an idea or thought that is related.
Why is it OK to ask someone who didn't go to law school if they understand their legal rights & the implications of waiving them _before_ they consult someone who did?
In my opinion her rights where not violated. She knew she could have an aturney even whitout cost. This is just bulshit*t what Owens said. I really don't like the guy. He is in it for the publishety. That's my opinion i don't say that the case but its my feeling
If she gets off on a technicality, that’s a travesty of justice. I don’t like this lawyer. He looks sneaky, like a weasel. What are his motivations? Fame? Fortune? He’s no novice, so surely he wasn’t listening to a siren call.
It would be beyond ridiculous if that interrogation got suppressed. Like Massive failings of loopholes in the justice system. BUT even if it did, there’s the video of her talking to law enforcement at the scene where she repeatedly states it was an accident, and of course the video of her laughing at him in the suitcase which speaks for itself 🤷♀️
It sounds like Owens makes motions first and looks for case law and evidence afterwards. The exact opposite of what an attorney should be doing. I don’t see why this is tolerated. He on working in a severe time crunch but sheesh. On the phone he admitted at the hearing that obviously the could not get the actual phone. It’s laughable and disturbing at the same time.
Even if this interrogation gets thrown out there are still the videos she filmed, the bodycam interviews from the scene of her talking about their “good night doing puzzles”, and the first interview all claiming “accident” and not “I was scared of him”. The jury is till going to get a lot of info so why not let them try and get this one interview out? It isn’t going to be enough to save her!
the video will also be thrown out because it was in this very interrogation she handed her phone over. Its being thrown out so the only evidence they have against her is thrown out. She is gonna walk!
In 2020 they only said the 4 statements. Now they add "do you understand the rights" and "do you want to talk with us". He does not have a case to supress
The OC Sheriffs Office field manual is available online. Sect 30 talks about Miranda. It talks about the waiver, authorizing either an express (reading the last question) OR an implied waiver, as acceptable.
@@wordsleuth992that's what I thought, I just realized my question wasn't complete lol so her saying "yes" is the consent, but why is Owen's tripping on the last part of the card? Like what's his point? Does he truly believe the rights wasn't read completely therefore Sarah was ignorantly coerced to talking?
The problem Sarah had the day after is that she was still drunk… an alcoholic does not sober up fully within 24 hours of a drinking bout. Many alcoholics I know keep a buzz going all the time so they are never really sober. Oh,and being drunk is not an excuse for failure to obey any law.
I was a sun up to sun down drinker and trust me I woke up sober. I would count down until my next drink if out of alcohol. She was definitely sober that morning.
I am telling you Plain and simple I will not waste my time watching this case ,if they throw the interrogation out ! WHAT WERE THEY THINKING? THEY CAUSE THIS CASE TO BE THROWN OUT ! BECAUSE THE FREAKEN COP CAN'T DO THEIR JOB??? WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYER MONEY BON THIS CRAP ! SCREW IT I HAVE A HURRICANE TO PREPARE FOR THIS IS WORTHLESS!🤬🤬🤬🤬
"We have to talk about it", "We found out you were present at the crime scene". You see? "We" means the investigators. Next argument please. Edit: "Anything you say ... will be used against you." I doubt! Every single word? And only against me? Then I won't even say good morning, if that will be used against me. Splitting hairs, but while we're at it...
Court’s closed tomorrow: “Due to Hurricane Helene, all Orange County Clerk of Courts offices will be closed tomorrow Thursday, September 26th to ensure the safety of our staff and customers. This follows the 9th judicial circuit's decision to cancel all court proceedings for Thursday, September 26th as well.”
Hide and seek doesn’t include locking a person up, mocking them, pushing him down the stairs ( which she admitted to doing), hearing him say he can’t breathe. Leaving him with injuries!!! And the lawyer wants to argue the last sentence of Miranda?
What I don’t understand is the fact where her guy friend was calling & calling her name to let him out & she’s standing there talking to him & refusing to open the suitcase??? It’s blatantly there ( evidence) …. That she deliberately killed him!
You KNOW there's a Google search on her phone from that night w 'not intentional' in the definition of SOMETHING!!! Maybe the diff btwn manslaughter & m*rder but it was at the forefront of her head the entire time she spoke w LEO's
I think Sara might have really screwed the pooch with this one. She should have stayed with Cashman. That was probably her best bet. This lawyer seems to be cutting corners or at least not putting in the best effort. Maybe it is a defense tactic because he knows she has no chance so maybe Sara will get lucky on appeal?? Just seems lazy to me. Why take the case if you’re not going to give it 100%?
I also believe that the Miranda caution Booze, sry, BooNe received was sufficient, and my intuitive feeling is that the motion to suppress the 2hr interrogation vidéo will be denied. This will put Owens in a very difficult situation bevausevhis theory of the crime will compete directly with that of the prosecution, which is entirely consistent with the evidence that has been made public via social média. A labour of Sisyphus. The testimony of Brian Boone during cross-examination will likely shatter Owens's argument as well.
I think that they should have done everything by the book.Period! There is a reason why the officer didn’t read the card in its entirety…what that was only she knows, but I believe they knew what they were doing which is not right. I will be surprised if the judge grants this motion, but I think he should.
Poor Mr Owens. He’s has this looming trial and now the hurricane is expected to hit in his hometown area. I do believe he’s representing Sara with a hood heart and not for popularity. I hope his mental health doesn’t suffer and Sara can have some compassion for him and what stress he must be going thru. I know it’s all about HER in her mind but I do hope she doesn’t beat him up like the others
Hi all I'm rewatch crew again . Tbf I remember first watching her integration and I dont believe she was read her rights properly and that female detection was awful so up herself and lazy . But boone still deserves life in prison for murder
If she skates, hilarious. Drunken day laborers everywhere will have to keep their hands to themselves or risk being converted into a contorted corpse too big for carry-on. Sloooow and excruciatingly like too. Stone Cold Sara is a antiheroine, one in a million. The la cucaracha is a peso for dos dozen.
I didn't see the Link at the end of this video that will put you on the RU-vid Podcat The Lawyer You know. Can someone give me that Link? Thanks in advance!
If that last statement/question aka Waiver, didn’t matter, why the H is it part of the Miranda Warning? Who created that card? Why was the final part put in print? Can’t wait for the judge’s opinion.
I’m so tired of the cover photo of the defendant. I think it’s gratuitous and stops me from even watching at this point. I do enjoy your take on trials very much.
It was very clear that the detective said, "We have to talk about that" in relation to his autopsy. Like, "You asked. We obviously will address it with you."
I think if she would not have answered the police officer with any communication after those rights were read you could assume that she did not want to speak, but if she started speaking after saying she understood she voluntarily gave all communication. It was not forced and there’s nothing illegal that police officer did in my opinion. She knew she did not have to talk to her. She knew that she could have a lawyer there anytime,she knew that things could be used against her and she spoke her by her own choice.
She was NOT free to leave at any point. They already saw the videos before she arrived and knew they were going to arrest her on murder. Telling her she was free to go wouldn’t have been a true statement.
33:01 I'd honestly imagine that this happens often, cops don't say the words exactly as written. There aren't a million cases on record bc of it so the chances of it flying are very slim! *Thank goodness!* I think this is just Owen's throwing everything at the wall to see if any of this spaghetti is done
