Subscribe
Shop Local
Magazine
Gas Prices
Today's Poll!Reporter's account: Security tight, questions to Bustamante direct
Public defenders Charlie Moreland, left, and Donald Catlett, right talk with reporters Tuesday after their client Alyssa Bustamante entered a guilty plea to second-degree murder in the 2009 death of 9-year-old Elizabeth Olten. Photo by Kelley McCall.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
For many Mid-Missouri reporters, covering Tuesday morning’s Alyssa Bustamante murder case hearing actually began late Monday afternoon, as we all were contacted about a possible plea agreement.
And that victim Elizabeth Olten’s family was none-too-pleased with the arrangement.
As media coordinator for the Cole County Circuit Court, my reporting work for the News Tribune sometimes shares my attention with handling the media requests for using cameras and audio recording devices in a court hearing — and those requests started flowing Monday evening, as we each were trying to verify that there really was a scheduled hearing.
So I sent an e-mail to Judge Patricia Joyce and Bailiff Donny Schulte, notifying them of the reporters’ interest in having cameras in the courtroom Tuesday morning, and followed that up with a phone call to Schulte.
While waiting, I told the other media’s callers that I didn’t know if ....
Earlier coverage:
Marry Me
Comments
kc911foryou 1 year, 4 months ago
This action sent a shock wave through all the interested community. The reduced charges allow for parole depending on the sentence Judge Joyce imposes. If this case follows as many other cases have done, this convicted felon could get credit for time served and be walking our streets again earlier than any of us would care to think. The only up side to this as far as I can see is that we don't have to pay for a trial and we can stop paying her public defender. Once she is in DOC then she can start paying back the state for all of those charges.
I hope the juvenile officer who blew any shot at a capital murder charge by acting inappropriately has been fired.
wow 1 year, 4 months ago
The JO is suppose to be present to make sure the Juvie-Offender is not mishandeld by the Cops. The JO is also an Officer of the Court and does have an obligation to enusure justice is done. I think in this case the JO performed both jobs. The problem isn't the JO asking the guilt seeking question.....the problem is that because of his/her asking such question...a truly guilty murderer is going to get a lesser punishment. Alyssa Bustamane is guilty of 1st Degree murder, but because of a technicality in the legal system (that needs to be changed) she is not gonna be convicted of 1st degree murder! That's not the zealous representation our law gaurantee's us all....that's the Defense Team happily Pimping the system....even though they know she is guilty of digging two graves sites, luring her victim to the grave site, strangeling, stabbing and then cutting the throat of an innocent 9 yr old and then burying the body. I don't blame the JO, I blame the Defense Attorney who knowingly allowed a murderer to escape proper punshment. I also blame the people who have failed to fix the loop hole.
Mr_Grimm 1 year, 4 months ago
I also blame the J.O.! yes, they are an officer of the court, BUT its their job to know when to make statements and when not. WERE TALKING MURDER....not some kid stealing snickers from walmart. its probably the biggest case that J.O. will ever work and they RUINED it. part of the job of law enforcement s to do the investigation (by following the evidence) in a manner that will not be thrown out of court. Thanks for ruining the hard work of good cops.
gofish 1 year, 4 months ago
It's not a loop hole WOW, it's a legal obligation for the JO to do the job that they were hired to do. She made a mistake and overstepped her boundaries. The defense attorney's did what they are legally required to do, which is to make sure the accused gets a fair trial. The outcome wasn't what you wanted. You have to understand that the laws that sometimes seem to favor the criminal are also supposed to protect the innocent from being falsely imprisoned (Dale Helmig). There are examples where the law has failed to do both. The only thing Alyssa may have "gained" from the JO's mistake was parole. At 15, and now 17, it's very remote that she would have been given life without parole anyways, so in reality, the outcome is not going to be much different. By the same token, a jury might have been more sympathetic to a troubled little girl (Alyssa) than what Judge Joyce may be. Her crime was that of an adult monster, but Alyssa is a messed up child.
Sequoia 1 year, 4 months ago
The defense attorney is also responsible for making sure all the investigating and prosecuting entities do their jobs correctly. They are the check and balance to the police and prosecutor. This benefits all of society. There is no loophole. The system is working as it should. It may be ugly, but of course most people don't like what they see when they look behind the scenes of any human institution. No institution is perfect.
In this case, it seems that there were mistakes in the investigation. The defense attorney SHOULD exploit that. Otherwise, there is no consequence for investigators who fail to follow the rules. It is too bad the case didn't go as it should have, but that is not the defense attorney's fault. By the defense doing its job, hopefully the institutions will make a better effort to follow the rules in the future.
Sequoia 1 year, 4 months ago
I'll also point out that everyone complains about lawyers and their tactics... until you need a lawyer yourself. Then you want them to pull out all the stops.
wow 1 year, 4 months ago
I don't care who it is. Right is right and Wrong is wrong. I say judge ME and ANYONE on the facts and circumstances which directly relate to the situation, not technicalities. When you disicpline your children do you consider such technicalities to what they did or did not do? HNYDSD!!!! And we shouldn't allow this to happen in our legal system either!
Yes, the rights of the accused must be adhered to, but when an adminitsrative error is allowed to determine their innocence or guilt. That's placing someones fate on a technicality. In the Bustamante case the JO asking a question obsovled a guilty person of comitting 1st degree murder. In the Helmig case the Prosecutor used some technicality to keep relavent evidence ommitted from the trial...in both cases those technicalities prevented justice from being done. These are flaws in the sytem that we know caused problems...yet instead of fixing them, they're allowed to continue becasue somebody is afraid to make a hard right decision/change. For that reason Dale Helmig spent so many years wrongfully convicted/incarcerated. It's the same reason Alyssa Bustamane will not be convicted of the crime we all know she is actually guilty of. I'm not calling for the Death Penalty, but I am calling for these loop holes to be closed and never used again to get a guilty person off.
Regretfully this isn't the first time for these type of legal loop holes, yet if they had been fixed before, perhaps Dale Helmig wouldn't have served those years for something he didn't do and today Alsyssa could be properly punished for what she did and not what she chose to pleed to!
IMO, NOBODY should be arrested, charged, tried and or convicted on anything except the facts and circumstances that are relavant to the crime. A violation of Miranda. corrupt Cops, Lawyer's, Judges, Jurry Members is one thing...but technicalies like in the Helmig, Bustamante case, let's close these loop holes....let's fix our system so these verdicts don't happen anymore.
I understand the JO made a HUUUUUUUGE error in Bustamante V Olten, but his/her error did not interfer with the actual facts and circumstances of who comitted the murder of innocent Elizabeth Olten! We owe it to this young vicitm to fix our system, because as good as it is. Our legal system is in need of some repair.
Just so nobody misunderstands me. None of us is above the law...if we don't make a change to improve our legal system all we're doing is allowing the verdicts to be determined by the lawyer who plays the system the best....and that ain't justice, that's playing a game of dice with someone's life!
tonto_goldberg 1 year, 4 months ago
The Helmig case did not involve any technicalities. The Special Prosecutor withheld evidence which he was required to provide to the defense. No one has offered any reason for his failure to do his job properly. Maybe he forgot....he was too busy...his dog ate it...it was in his other briefcase and he was running late...it was misfiled...I could go on.
He got his conviction and it looked like a win for his side at the time. Evidently he didn't consider convicting the wrong guy a problem.
Gabrielle 1 year, 4 months ago
wow: do the right thing.
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting
Or login with:
OpenID