Thread by @socialistdogmom

did some retro live tweeting today (aka i took notes). gonna dump 'em into a thread.
--- A12 related prelim. hearings for:
- guy who fired a gun into a crowd
- 2 guys who beat the everloving shit out of deandre harris
- cowardly little shitstain that murdered a woman

four white supremacists in court today -- richard preston (discharging a firearm within 1000 feet of a school), alex ramos (felonious assault of deandre harris), jacob goodwin (malicious wounding of deandre harris), and james alex fields (we all know damn well what he did)

charges against fields: malicious wounding (3), aggravated malicious wounding (3), felonious assault (2), felony hit & run [46.2-894], and FIRST degree murder. docket had it as 2nd, but these charges were newly amended to 1st. first 8 charges are related to 8 specific victims.

arrived 12:30. security tighter than normal & hearings were in circuit courtroom, despite being district court cases. no devices of any kind allowed, even turned off. i was asked to remove my boots & was wanded very thoroughly (they don't normally press the wand into your flesh).

not many available seats when i arrived. whole (then empty) benches were marked as reserved. only available seat was by jason kessler. i can see why the seat was empty. i overheard a bit of conversation between him & some of the witnesses/families for the preston case.

he praises elmer woodard for his performance at cantwell's hearing, saying he "really fought that" "going to the mat and arguing the whole case." jason, like elmer, does not understand the purpose of a preliminary hearing. you don't argue "the whole case" at these hearings.

asking the couple in front of him, "are y'all the ones they were yelling at? what set them off?" (referring to antiracist activists outside) "they're like little children. you can hear them crying like children."

he says, in a mocking, imitative voice "blood on your hands, blood on your hands" then, "blood is on THEIR hands 'cause their buddies attacked a car." at this point, i am rethinking my willingness to sit near this fucking dirtbag.

of one of the people charged with assaulting him on aug 13 (phoebe, i believe is her name?): "the woman who attacked me is a teacher, so she'll probably lose her job." he smiles, pleased with himself. does he not know he is the villain in this story?

"they might throw me out. they treat me differently than they treat anyone else" -- says the man who's been completely and totally protected by our police department every step of the goddamn way, despite bringing this nazi terror to our town. the feigned victimhood is disgusting

the couple asks him about fields. JK tells well rehearsed story about how no one knew him, he wasn't with a group that day. explains that all his people were told not to park in the city. that fields parked in the city means he didn't know anyone. weird logic.

he does sound very sympathetic to fields regarding his parking situation. he implies that fields was just some guy who showed up and then he was just trying to leave, got confused? just a big parking misunderstanding, i guess. poor thing.

mason pickett is sitting alone in the back row, at the end of a bench. all alone. looking like a depressed, angry tortoise. before the hearing, he'd been standing on the steps of the courthouse, back turned, while antiracist activists yelled at him. he's shameless.

judge downer opens with a reminder that there will be silence in the courtroom. any disturbance will result in removal from the room. no tolerance, no acceptions. he's been doing this at most hearings lately, but he seems sterner than usual. and tired.

preston is up first. makes sense they'd save fields for last. preston being represented by elmer woodard -- the foghorn leghorn country-type country lawyer who represented cantwell at his hearing. you know it'll be a long one -- he drags things out.

elmer asks if corey long is present (he isn't). claims to have subpoenaed him. judge emphasizes IF - "if it was duly served, i'll issue a show cause for failure to appear." comes out later that perhaps it was NOT duly served. elmer unable to produce proof it was actually served.

asked if he would like to make an opening statement, he says only "nah." 8 defense witnesses are sworn & leave the courtroom. attorney & former mayor frank buck takes the stand as witness for CA.

it is at this point that three women i respect very much, three strong black women & antiracist activists, enter the courtroom and seat themselves on the other side of jason. one puts her arm on the back of the bench and whispers "hi jason." god bless 'em. ✊✊🏽✊🏾✊🏿

elmer takes issue with the word "aiming" to characterize what preston did with the gun. says buck can't possibly know that. this is absurd. buck revises testimony to say preston "POINTED" the gun. elmer also objects to buck testifying that he heard someone say "kill the nigger"

what strikes me about buck's testimony is what happened after the shot. not at issue in this hearing, but he followed preston for quite some time, trying to find an officer to tell about what happened. he was not able to engage an officer, went to the police station.

the deputy buck spoke to at the police station told him they were "a bit busy", sent him to talk to the magistrate. after buck gave sworn statement to the magistrate, CA chapman signed the (john doe) warrant (preston not yet ID'ed).

elmer’s cross examination was frenetic & confrontational, just like all examination during cantwell's hearing. he interrupts the witness, makes statements instead of asking questions, asks vague and confusing questions. buck is an attorney and navigates this process impressively.

also echoing cantwell's hearing: elmer aggressively confronts the witness, asks why he didn't swear out warrants against corey long, too. judge shuts this down, he withdraws it. judge (again) explains what a preliminary hearing is & how it works. this happens many times.

to be quite honest, i took NINETEEN pages of notes on my little mini legal pad during the TWO HOURS elmer dragged this shit out. i'm up to page 7 at this point. he's a shitty lawyer and not even a good showman. he has a rudimentary grasp of the law & courtroom procedure.

we watched the tape quite a few times. he called 5 of his 8 witnesses. a variety of sob stories and lies were told. both ACA platania & the judge explained to him various elements of the law & points of procedure throughout the hearing.

he returns many times to self defense, even hands the judge a printout of relevant caselaw arguing that defending others is reasonable. ACA (and judge) remind him that prelim hearing is not the place for an affirmative defense. the charge is certified & goes to grand jury dec 18

can't finish out this hearing's notes without pointing out that elmer woodard, racist attorney at law, called richard preston "a hero" for what he did. for firing a gun into a crowd. they can both go straight to hell.

3:10pm - ramos & goodwin's hearings are being conducted together. goodwin represented by elmer woodard, ramos by john joyce. i don't know who joyce is, but i do pity him having to work with woodard. several times i swear he looked embarrassed to be seated at the table with him.

elmer's subpoena for deandre harris was not served. "no such tenant" at that address. elmer chooses not to continue the case & wait for subpoena to be served. this hearing mostly involved watching the same few minutes of video over and over and over again.

during the video of altercations on market st, kessler is slowly shaking his head, like he disagrees with the existence of facts. elmer objects to audio on the video, judge says he'll disregard it, ACA antony says she'll mute it.

during discussion over the objection, someone is lazily drawing circles with a green laser pointer on the wall behind the defense table. witness had been given a red one. who was doing this? ACA (and soon to be CA) platania? this is all absurd.

ramos' lawyers cross examination was brief and heavily implied that deandre had instigated the assault somehow, asked whether or not det. hickey was aware of any "incidents" not on camera that may have occurred prior.

elmer's cross exam lasted a painful half hour. like cantwell's hearing, he subjects us to an excruciating frame-by-frame look at the video. often, he isn't even asking questions, just showing still frames & adding his own commentary, occasionally acknowledging the witness

he's particularly concerned with an unidentified man he calls "boonie hat." the fact that this man has not been identified and charged has no real bearing on what his client did, but he seems to believe that if not all assailants have been caught, maybe his client should go free?

another classic elmer move: reading aloud from the statute itself. he also claims harris' wounds were from another unidentified man he calls "salmon shirt" & are mostly from falling down, tripping over a bike rack. says there's no evidence that any injuries were caused by clients

he claims there was no intent to maim harris, that no one hit him, maybe they kicked him "in the bottom." "you can't disfigure someone by hitting them in the bottom. can't disable them." (disfigure & disable being terms from the statute he claims doesn't apply)

he repeatedly asks det. hickey what he knows about riot training, about using a shield. he's really worked up at this point, very close to hickey and riled up. insists that hickey agree that the video shows goodwin's shield is in a "defensive position" and couldn't be a weapon.

he reiterates that deandre was armed & "ran into" the fight, despite video evidence of deandre desperately trying to flee and goodwin repeatedly knocking him to the ground. elmer asks goodwin to stand & demonstrates lightly pushing him, claiming that's all goodwin did to deandre.

elmer also says there's "no evidence of bodily injury." what the actual fuck? did he misspeak? does he mean something else? because that man nearly died. look at his fucking face. how many stitches? and you say no intent to maim? no bodily harm?

"years ago when i was much thinner, i did tae kwon do. i kicked a lot of people." elmer lists several tae kwon do achievements, including beating a 6'5" man at kicking (?!?! what the fuck is happening here?). somehow this proves you can fight without intent to maim? or something?

ACA antony brings up 'concert of action,' which hadn't been mentioned yet. all parties are liable for the actions of the group beating deandre. even if goodwin or ramos didn't individually put all of those wounds on deandre, they're responsible.

judge downer, AGAIN, explains what a prelim hearing is. "my view of the video is he clearly kicked him" says defendants "cruelly, intentionally, severely wounded" deandre. he certified charges against both defendants, will go to grand jury dec. 18.

judge downer closes by saying "i don't applaud the actions of anyone involved in any of the fracas and i hope the police will continue to investigate" especially re: the the unidentified man on the tap elmer calls "boonie hat."

just after 4:30, a group led by susan bro, heather heyer's mother, files in. there is a woman with a cane, her leg in a massive brace. people injured by fields on A12 and their families. woman next to me says "i feel like we should stand." powerful moment.

james alex fields is represented by denise lunsford, former commonwealth attorney in albemarle county. didn't catch co-counsel's name, but there's another lawyer at the table, a white man. fields says nothing, moves little. he doesn't look like he's having a good time in jail.

i was surprised to see only one person rise to be sworn in as a witness. none of the victims or witnesses were sworn in, just a single CPD detective, steven young.

young testifies he arrived at the scene after fields was pulled over on monticello ave. he uses a laser pointer to show damage, blood on a picture of the car. a pair of sunglasses is lodged in the spoiler. he emphasizes damage to rear windshield took place AFTER initial crash.

4:45 pm people are tense. some people are crying or have their heads down. i'm thinking of susan, of the other victims, looking at closeup pictures of a murder weapon. wondering whose blood it is on the crushed front of the car.

ACA antony asks det. young not to trail off, to speak up. he's answering questions about the severity of injuries of the victims. he's having trouble getting out that a woman died. antony is the first to say heather's name, asked if anyone was killed.

det. young says they have been able to confirm 36 victims (includes heather), collected medical records from UVA & martha jefferson, took victim statements. did not say, but seemed to imply, there were other victims unwilling/unable to speak to police.

young testifies about the groups of counterprotesters converging on the mall around 1:20pm. emphasizes that they caused no harm to, did not engage with other cars they encountered. he describes a hopeful, triumphant crowd marching peacefully & singing.

describes dodge challenger driving slowly from market onto 4th, idling there. there was no obstruction behind him on 4th or market, could easily have backed out. video & witnesses confirm. drives "at a high rate of speed" into the crowd, then reverses "at a high rate of speed"

5:05 ACA antony brings up video shot by VSP helicopter on A12. i believe this is the helicopter that crashed, killing the two troopers inside (need to confirm that). if it is... very eerie to hear dead men describe witnessing a murder.

"holy shit, did you see that?" "holy crap." troopers are stunned to have utterly accidentally witnessed the incident. they'd been in the area doing general surveillance. the incident is caught on tape, they are able to follow the car as fields fled.

fields is tracked by the helicopter, pursued by a marked police car. he's finally pulled over on monticello. tries, briefly, to drive away again. only one officer on the scene at this time, fields has his hands out the window. all very visible on helicopter footage.

another police vehicle arrived (i think young said UVA PD??). fields is out of the car, put on the ground. young testifies "he repeatedly said 'i'm sorry', he asked if the people were ok." asked if he wanted rescue services, fields said he'd rather have them help those people.

that last bit not in quotes because young testified fields would rather have EMS at 4th st. lunsford clarifies that fields is not familiar with the area and would not have used the street name. the exact quote from fields was not made clear, but young was clear on the sentiment.

5:15pm we see surveillance video from red pump kitchen, restaurant on 4th st. video shows fairly narrow angle of 4th st on market st side. this angle is probably useful for seeing who comes and goes from a door, not as useful for monitoring the street. we do see the car.

fields' challenger moves through the frame. young testifies that it does not reappear for 1min 10sec. this means he must've sat, idling, on the mall, out of frame but not yet ramming the crowd, for about a minute (this is my editorializing -- young didn't speculate about idling)

on the red pump video, we see the maroon van, black truck, and white sedan that end up in the same 4th & water st. intersection. the white sedan was 3rd through, ends up struck by fields.

at 5:25pm, a man gets up, shouting "man fuck this shit. i gotta go." he and two women get up to leave. he judge tells him he will need to leave (zero tolerance policy on disruption, as previously stated). the man is already standing and says "man, take me out. fuck this."

the man, marcus martin, was severely injured in the attack after pushing his fiancee out of the way of the car. it's easy to imagine why he might be overwhelmed and upset. you'd think we could have a moment's compassion for people traumatized by this monster.

this was during frame by frame analysis of fields' car approaching the site of the attack. i understand the need for order, but the cold, brutal insistence on silence is dehumanizing. this man was the victim of a terrorist attack. give him a fucking second to have a feeling.

much of lunsford's cross examination seems to be to establish that fields didn't know anyone else there, wasn't radical. no charge of conspiracy though, so why does this matter? he did it, he did it alone. no one disagrees there.

lunsford asks about warrants served, asks if young executed any himself, if he was the one to examine the cell phone. presses young for ANY proof fields communicated with white nationalist groups prior to the event or met up with any at the event. young says no evidence he did.

no proof he coordinated with any group beforehand. young testifies that fields was seen with a group of men assoc with vanguard america in the park, then corrects himself, saying they wore insignia of VA, no proof they were with the group. no proof fields was with any group.

her line of questioning refers to written statements from three men. she does not use their names, but asks young if he's familiar with the statements (he is). these three men did not know fields prior to A12, but walked with him from the park.

3 men say he had no weapons (young testifies none were found). one described him as "significantly less radical" than other folks at the rally. they saw no sign of anger or violence in fields (it wasn't stated, but i got the impression this was immediately prior to the attack)

lunsford asks about a "yellow stain" on fields' shirt. young says it was not determined what it was, but it smelled like urine. ACA antony clarifies that there's no proof anyone threw anything at fields in his car. unclear what this whole line of inquiry was about.

the idea that perhaps he was provoked/scared, that someone threw something on him will surely come up at trial. lots of online argument about him just making a wrong turn, then getting attacked by antifa or thugs or the boogeyman or something. this didn't come up at the hearing.

lunsford asks young is fields "stopped to render aid," which of course he didn't. this may be building toward the argument that he was scared for his life. again, this wasn't said... but there aren't many explanations for a lawyer pointing out her client's craven action

during this exchange, lunsford says fields & the 3 men walked back to mcintire park together & fields had given them a ride somewhere? this was glossed over as if it were established fact, so maybe i misinterpreted it. but it sounds like the 3 men knew him from that walk & ride

ACA antony reiterated there was no obstruction or impediment preventing fields from backing out of 4th st back onto market. she's pre-empting an argument that wasn't even made -- that he was trapped, panicked, and that's why he drove through the crowd. this will come up at trial.

no closing statement or objection of any kind from lunsford. lunsford really said very little throughout. gotta be tough knowing you're representing someone that guilty.

judge certified all charges. ACA antony asks the judge to keep court in session after things are finished, long enough for the victims & families to leave the courtroom. this is reasonable & respectful.

i honestly think i forgot to mention at the top -- the charges were amended to FIRST degree murder. docket had it as 2nd. i assumed they went with 2nd because it's easier to prosecute. interesting choice to go with the (correct) charge of 1st degree. ambitious.

to clarify - ACA antony said those 8 charges are related to 8 individual, specific victims, leaving the door open for the possibility of more charges from indiv victims. she didn't SAY this, but brought it up in a way that wasn't necessary, seemed to imply more charges possible

this information also appears in the heaphy report. i’ll grab that page citation later. worth noting that quite a few of the people who wouldn’t talk to heaphy had concerns about making statements pertaining to pending litigation.

in my conversation w/the magistrate a while back, i learned quite a bit about this process. any officer can sign a warrant sworn out by a citizen at the magistrate’s office. typical for CA to sign warrants for more serious crimes. hard to say if it’s significant in this instance

that terminology is, admittedly confusing. to clarify: “continuing” the case would mean pushing the hearing to another date, when the subpoenaed witness would hopefully be present. choosing not to continue, confusingly, meant they continued (in the normal sense) to the hearing

p. 122 of the heaphy report, for reference.

he cites the same case he did in cantwell's hearing (is it the only one he knows?) foster v. commonwealth (recognizing defense of others "is commensurate with self-defense") & goes as far as giving platania & judge downer a prischolar.google.com/scholar_case?c…://t.co/5VkweeKdH8

3rd party self defense requires "the person defended faces an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death & that such person was not at fault in bringing about the necessity to use the deadly force." meaning preston had to REASONABLY believe corey long would kill those people

John ("Jake" or &qsnookandhaughey.com/attorneys/j-p-…ps://t.co/JQZZ8JAj1O

if i recall correctly, the audio at this point is, for the most part, just someone yelling general exclamations like "YEAH!" "WOOOO!" the voice allegedly belongs to deandre. perhaps elmer was concerned the racial slurs you hear are from his client?

interestingly, this is the SAME audio that joyce later references as he implies that these 'taunts' on market street before the altercation somehow instigated the fight, making 'malice' an impossible legal threshold to meet. two attorneys at odds with one another.

this is from michigan court of appeals case, but the principal applies. by participating in ANY PORTION of this group effort (knocking him down, striking him even once, etc), ALL PARTIES are equally liable for the entire assault.

i have spent a lot of time in court this year, but it's all (except cantwell's hearing) been with judge downer. i have no point of comparison. i do enjoy it when he makes such clear value judgments from the bench. is this typical?

i noticed the absence of a few victims i know, some of whom i know are also named plaintiffs in a civil suit. this is probably a coincidence, as others were missing, too. showing up is a deeply personal decision. these people have been through hell.

a number of folks remarked that he looked like he'd lost a significant amount of weight. same was true of cantwell at his hearing. in cantwell's case, i assumed it was because he lost access to his crazy bodybuilding supplements. maybe fields just has a sliver of a conscience?

if every fucking news outlet on the planet could go back and correct their coverage of this event, we'd really appreciate it. this "19 victims" thing is HALF of the LOWEST POSSIBLE NUMBER of victims.

interesting that he emphasized this, unprompted, several times. he's pre-empting the argument (not yet made in court, but popular online) that the crowd attacked the car, provoking fields. (unclear how they could've done that anyway, as he rammed them from far away, very quickly)

i've seen this confirmed elsewhere and the heaphy report seems to indicate there was only a single helicopter. p. 147 states that "the VSP helicopter that had been providing aerial video [...] had crashed."

the voices we heard reacting to the crash in that video were those of Lieutenant H. Jay Cullen and Trooper-Pilot Berke M. M. Bates. those men died a few hours later when their helicopter crashed on the way to provide aerial support for gov. mcauliffe's motorcade.

wondering now what it would've been like to have cullen & bates testify. i assume they would have, as law enforcement officers who witnessed the actual attack. i wonder if their testimony would change anything about the overall arc of this trial.

he was clearly headed for 64. he was pulled over headed S on monticello, past carlton, .5mi from 64. based on footage, he took a pretty direct route. that's my neighborhood. i know. he knew where he was going & he was fleeing. pulling an OJ, helicopter and all.

out of curiosity, does anyone know if fields suffered any injuries? whiplash? bloody lip? did he NEED ems services at that time? also, just would like to know for my own enlightenment. he looked fine in the mug shot, but i'd like to imagine he at least broke his nose.

to be fair, i've lived here for ten years and the only reason i can tell you which one's 4th st now is because of what he did. again, though -- he knew his way around well enough to flee toward the interstate.