The big day is almost here, and those seeking "justice for Rusty" will undoubtedly be locked onto what promises to be a dramatic trial.
While there are several grounds for appeal already, look for other avenues for the Defense to appeal in the event the Jury convicts Andrea of any count.
Look for me on twitter @SpeakerDave for live updates and analysis/commentary during the trial. I've tried to remain unbiased during the pre-trial media frenzy, but I expect to form an opinion on guilt or innocence as the evidence unfolds during the trial. Nevertheless, I intend to analyze the evidence with as keen an eye as any attorney with his own case. I will also try to present the "devil's advocate" position and challenge you to avoid rushing to judgment before all the evidence is in.
Are you ready?
Please join us on the Dunwoody Murder Trial Discussion Club (#DMTDC) facebook group for moderated, sensible, intelligent, discussion and analysis.
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Ariela Neuman seeks to Quash a Subpoena
Ariela Neuman’s Motion to QuashDeposition Subpoena
[The Link to the Motion to Quash is at the end of this post]
On February 19, 2013, Ariela Neuman, the ex-wife of Hemy Neuman,filed a Motion to Quash a Subpoena served on her by Andrea Sneiderman’sattorneys. IF you don't know, Hemy Neuman admitted to shooting RustySneiderman, and was convicted of the murder.
The subpoena, issued in the criminal matter, requires Ariela to produce documents by Feb. 21st. Andrea Sneiderman's attorneys are looking for information to use in Andrea's defense. Ariela contends the request is improper. Ultimately, a Judge will decide what documents she must produce.
While thetechnical and legal arguments may be quite boring to read, even for manyattorneys, there are two footnotes that will raise an eyebrow or two. These footnotes allegedly quote some of the jailhouse conversationsbetween Joseph Dell and Andrea Sneiderman during Sneiderman’s incarcerationafter her arrest. I will let you draw your own conclusions from these allegedstatements. However, I’m curious to hear what you think about AndreaSneiderman’s alleged consideration of Sandra Bullock to play Sneiderman in amovie about this case.
Remember,this matter is about Rusty Sneiderman. Rusty Sneiderman lost his life. His two young kids will likely only have photos to remind them abouttheir father. It seems they were probably too young to develop memories thatwould not fade within a few years. What Would Sandra Bullock Do? #WWSBD
Please send your questions and comments to me soI know what you really find important.
As promised,here is link to a copy of the Motion to Quash.
Follow me on twitter forinstant updates and additional info on this case, including the pending civilmatters, links to good articles, and links to live streams of hearings and thetrial. I welcome your comments and criticism.
For inquiries or more information:
Email David Weinberg
The Re-Indictment of Andrea Sneiderman
The Re-Indictment of Andrea
Sneiderman
[The Link to the Re-Indictment is at the end of this post]
On February 19, 2013, the DA filed a
Re-indictment of Andrea Sneiderman. The State dropped the RICO and Insurance
Fraud counts. But, the State added several new counts. Here are all 16 Counts:
(1) Malice Murder
(2) Felony Murder
(3) Aggravated Assault
(4) Hindering the Apprehension of a Criminal
(5) Concealment of Material Facts
(6) False Statement
(7) Perjury
(8) False Statement
(9) Perjury
(10)
Perjury
(11)
False
Statement
(12)
Perjury
(13)
False
Statement
(14)
Perjury
(15)
Perjury
(16)
Perjury
I will follow up as soon as possible with analysis
and commentary on this development. For now, please send your questions and
comments to me so I know what you think is important.
As promised, here is link to a copy of the
Re-indictment.
Please follow me on twitter
for instant updates and additional info on this case, including the pending
civil matters, links to good articles, and live streams of hearings and the
trial. I welcome your comments and criticism.
For inquiries or more information:
Email David Weinberg
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Andrea Sneiderman Seeks to Postpone Depositions in Civil Matter
[Links to Andrea's Motion and the Plaintiff’s Response are at the end of this post.]
On January 4, 2013, Andrea Sneiderman moved the Court in the civil forfeiture action to postpone all depositions, including hers, until after the criminal case against her is resolved. Andrea Sneiderman's attorney's explain "the simple reason is that Mrs. Sneiderman should not be placed in a position where she is forced to defend against the allegations in the State's forfeiture case and, in so doing, potentially make statements in deposition testimony that the prosecutors will attempt to use against her in the Criminal Case."
The Defense Attorneys further explain, "to protect herself, she may choose to assert her right against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment and/or under O.C.G.A § 24-9-27 and refuse to answer certain questions.” Andrea’s attorney’s conclude the result is Andrea Sneiderman is “between a rock and a hard place.” If she takes the 5th, there may be a negative inference imposed in the civil matters; if she answers questions, the prosecution will use her statements against her. Consequently, Andrea’s attorneys contend, it is highly likely that Andrea would take the 5th to numerous questions which would require the Court to later evaluate each and every assertion of the 5th to determine whether it was properly asserted or whether Andrea must answer the question.
In response, attorneys for the Estate of Russell Sneiderman counter that, “[Andrea] repeatedly claims that she has done nothing to warrant the legal mess that she finds herself ensnared in . . . and that if she only could have the opportunity to have her story told, she would be exonerated.” Counsel for the Estate continues, “when finally provided with the opportunity she asked for to answer questions about her role in the slaying of her late husband, the Defendant instead intends to cowardly seek shelter in the Fifth Amendment. “[Andrea’s Motion] represents yet another desperate attempt by Defendant . . . to demand to be treated differently than any other person charged with crimes in the State of Georgia.” Plaintiff’s counsel adds that delaying the depositions prejudices the minor children who are entitled to the insurance money paid to Andrea from policies on Rusty’s life.
The lawyers on both sides delve a little deeper into the law supporting their arguments, slicing and dicing the legal technicalities. But, this summary should give you a good overall picture from which to make your own decision about whether Andrea should be compelled to testify at a deposition in the civil matter or whether she may wait until the criminal trial ends.
To be sure, both sides make valid points. Andrea will undoubtedly be put in a classic Catch 22 if she has to sit for a deposition. But, by itself, that is not typically sufficient reason to postpone depositions. Witnesses always risk saying something in a deposition that hurts their case. It should be no secret that Attorneys take depositions, in part, to get information to use against the witness. One reason witnesses may assert the 5th amendment is to avoid answering questions that tend to implicate them in a crime. Likewise, if your answers do not tend to incriminate you in a crime, you have no need to assert the 5th Amendment. On the other hand, even the best, most innocent, answers can be turned around and used against you by a good attorney. That is why you hire your own attorneys to defend you.
So, perhaps the risk of incriminating herself is not the strongest ground upon which Andrea could seek to postpone her deposition. But, that is the argument her attorneys make.
Ultimately, the decision is for the Judge to make. And, Judges have extremely broad discretion to control discovery and depositions. I would not be surprised if the Judge agrees with Andrea. Only in cases where a Judge abuses her discretion will she be reversed. It would be a big win for Andrea if she can postpone depositions until after the criminal trial.
I do not envy the Judge making this decision. It is not as easy as you may think. The briefs are relatively short and provide useful, insight into this fierce battle. I encourage you to read them, consider both sides, and then pretend you are the Judge. Tell me, how would you rule and why? As promised, here are the briefs:
Please follow me on twitter for instant updates and additional info on this case, including the pending civil matters, links to good articles, and live streams of hearings and the trial. I welcome your comments and criticism.
For inquiries or more information:
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
The Defense Pre-Trial Motions as of 1/16/13
There are the three pre-trial motions filed by Andrea Sneiderman's defense team for the December 7, 2012, deadline.
1. Motion in Limine
2. Motion to Dismiss
3. Motion for Juror Questionnaire
Enjoy, and share your comments and questions either here, or twitter @SpeakerDave, or on Facebook: Dunwoody Murder Trial Drinking Club #DMTDC
1. Motion in Limine
2. Motion to Dismiss
3. Motion for Juror Questionnaire
Enjoy, and share your comments and questions either here, or twitter @SpeakerDave, or on Facebook: Dunwoody Murder Trial Drinking Club #DMTDC
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Update: What if the DA Agrees to Change Venue?
What if the DA agrees to change venue?
In my August 25th post about change of venue, I did not address the possibility that the DA might to agree to change venue. A change of venue would address the issue whether it is possible to obtain an impartial jury not already influenced by pre-trial publicity of this case.
Andrea Sneiderman wants to find jurors that know absolutely
nothing about this case. She wants jurors who have not seen the Hemy
Neuman trial or her testimony from that trial. She wants jurors who have not
yet been swayed against her by the pre-trial publicity. She would contend
that it is impossible to seat an impartial jury from DeKalb County. She would contend it is impossible to find a
panel of jurors that has not been prejudiced by pre-trial publicity. In
short, she wants a change of venue in order to seat a jury that is unaffected
by the pre-trial publicity.
While the DA may see an advantage by keeping this trial in
DeKalb County for many reasons, the DA might agree to a stipulation to change
venue for other strategic reasons. A stipulation as to a change of venue
would eliminate any ground Andrea would have to appeal an unfavorable verdict
(e.g. guilty) based on an inability to obtain an impartial jury on account of
pre-trial publicity.
I would suspect all parties would prefer to keep the trial at
the DeKalb County court house for convenience. As nice as some of
Georgia's remote counties are, spending five weeks away from home for a trial
can be a strain on anyone. Nevertheless, if the parties agree on how to
pay the costs to import a jury from one of Georgia's 159 Counties and
house them for the anticipated 5 week trial, Andrea would get her new jury pool
and everyone could stay local. In the alternative, the parties could
agree to move the trial to a different county, in a different court house, and
even with a different Judge.
If the matter is moved to a different County, Judge Adams may
still preside over the trial. Do not forget, however, that Judge
Adams has several cases that he must handle while presiding over Andrea's
trial, and those cases are not paused during the pendency of a long trial.
Judge Adams cannot be away from his court room for five weeks.
If you recall, there were several occasions that the Judge would pause
the Hemy Neuman trial for an afternoon, or for a day, so that he could conduct
other business, i.e. attend to other cases, or personal matters. Thus,
for Judge Adams to handle this case in another County would mean having to
coordinate attending to other matters. It is possible, but would
certainly put a strain on the Judge.
I would remind readers that a change of venue is, first and
foremost, a method of changing to a jury pool that is unaffected by pre-trial
publicity. It does not necessarily mean a new physical location or new
Judge. For fans of Judge Adams, I think it is still likely Judge Adams
will preside over this trial even if there is a change of venue either by order
of the Court or by stipulation of the parties. Judge Adams is very
familiar with this matter, and the law favors the resulting judicial economy
and efficiency from having a judge familiar with the case, parties, counsel,
etc.
I mentioned above that Georgia has 159 Counties. Outside
the metro areas of Atlanta, Macon, Augusta, Columbus and Savannah, Georgia is
less metropolitan. I am a Georgia native.
I love my southern roots. I
thoroughly enjoy day trips to Georgia’s rural cities. However, for the purposes of litigation strategy,
you have to consider that Georgia's rural areas are considered to have
conservative juries presenting an entirely different challenge to overcome as
opposed to pre-trial publicity.
If I were Andrea's defense team, I would have serious
reservations about moving this trial into a rural area where Andrea Sneiderman could
ostracize the jury merely because she is not like them, e.g. she is Jewish, wealthy,
highly educated, married a Harvard graduate, etc. “My Cousin Vinnie” was a movie, but recall the
jury animosity towards the Karate Kid at the outset of that trial? It was creative Hollywood scriptwriters that wrote
an acquittal. In the real world, jury
selection is an industry in and of itself.
Perhaps that is why Andrea’s lawyers may have suggested Savannah, as
reported by the Crier? Savannah may not be as metropolitan as Atlanta,
but it is certainly not as rural as some county seats, such as Talbotton, in Talbot County, Georgia. (To the 7000 residents of Talbot County, and the 1200 or so in
the city of Talbotton, please direct your comments to my address below).
I tend to think Andrea would do better staying in an Atlanta
metro-area county and screening a large jury pool, searching for individuals
who have not followed the pre-trial press. Yes - as unlikely as it may
seem to some of you reading this blog from the other side of the globe, there
are people in Atlanta, lawyers in my office even, who reside in DeKalb county,
who would not recognize such names and phrases as “Andrea Sneiderman,” “Hemy
Neuman,” “Shayna Citron” or “Dunwoody Daycare Murder.”
Regardless of whether there is a change of venue, we all should
still be able to view the trial unless a new court or judge determines it does
not want cameras in its courtroom.
For inquiries or more
information:
(404) 844-5700
Monday, September 24, 2012
Join the Dunwoody Murder Trial Discussion Club #DMTDC
If you are enjoying the debates about the
Andrea Sneiderman and Hemy Neuman murder cases, there are other people that want to meet you, especially if you are in the Atlanta area.
I lead a periodic in-person discussion group called the Dunwoody Murder
Trial Discussion Club (#DMTDC, for short). We have been featured on InSession and in local
Atlanta news outlets. While we have more than 60 online members, our gatherings usually attract 6 to 12 individuals for happy-hour discussions at a Dunwoody pub.
If you want to be part of the best Dunwoody day care murder trial discussion, on and off the internet, then visit the Dunwoody Murder
Trial Discussion Club Facebook Page.
I practice law with Winter Capriola Zenner, LLC in Atlanta, Georgia. I grew up
in Dunwoody and live in the Atlanta area. I litigate business and real
estate disputes, and also provide legal analysis and commentary regarding high-profile
civil and criminal cases in the Atlanta Area. I regularly tweet and
welcome your comments and questions.
For inquiries or more information:
Email David Weinberg
(404) 844-5700
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)