Brian Peixoto Case Discussion

Re: Brian Peixoto Case Discussion

Postby Bill Williams » Fri Nov 18, 2016 4:20 pm

Clive Wismayer wrote:
Bill Williams wrote:
Clive Wismayer wrote:
Bill Williams wrote:Upon a second read of your first sentence above - I have no clue what you mean when you pair two statements: "who very likely did not do what was alleged" and "bore some, possibly a considerable, measure of responsibility for the death". To my untrained ear the pairing of those two statements makes no sense.

Havard is alleged to have digitally penetrated the child and murdered her. I do not believe he did either. I do believe he may have struck her however. Does that clear it up?

Taking things one at a time.....

No, it remains fuzzy. The two sentences are as above, the second one being - "bore some, possibly a considerable, measure of responsibility for the death".

If you believe he struck her, and you believe that that action bears some "responsibility" for the death, why are you not advocating that he be found guilty? If he had struck her, and you do not think that counts as part of "murdering her", how does striking her...... I think you can anticipate what I am about to say.....

Ever heard of manslaughter?

So you think this was something a little beyond an accident, where whoever did this bore some criminal liability?

Okay. I did not get that meaning from the two sentences when side by side.
    “The only way I can pay back for what fate and society have handed me is to try, in minor totally useless ways, to make an angry sound against injustice.”
    Martha Gellhorn
Bill Williams
 
Posts: 8044
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 5:49 pm

Re: Brian Peixoto Case Discussion

Postby Clive Wismayer » Fri Nov 18, 2016 4:25 pm

Bill Williams wrote:
Clive Wismayer wrote:
Bill Williams wrote:
Clive Wismayer wrote:
Bill Williams wrote:Upon a second read of your first sentence above - I have no clue what you mean when you pair two statements: "who very likely did not do what was alleged" and "bore some, possibly a considerable, measure of responsibility for the death". To my untrained ear the pairing of those two statements makes no sense.

Havard is alleged to have digitally penetrated the child and murdered her. I do not believe he did either. I do believe he may have struck her however. Does that clear it up?

Taking things one at a time.....

No, it remains fuzzy. The two sentences are as above, the second one being - "bore some, possibly a considerable, measure of responsibility for the death".

If you believe he struck her, and you believe that that action bears some "responsibility" for the death, why are you not advocating that he be found guilty? If he had struck her, and you do not think that counts as part of "murdering her", how does striking her...... I think you can anticipate what I am about to say.....

Ever heard of manslaughter?

So you think this was something a little beyond an accident, where whoever did this bore some criminal liability?

Okay. I did not get that meaning from the two sentences when side by side.

Mea culpa. I can see a guy lashing out reflexively and without thinking. I do not suggest that is what happened here. I don't know anything like enough about the case.
Clive Wismayer
 

Re: Brian Peixoto Case Discussion

Postby B. Peixoto Family » Mon Jan 16, 2017 9:02 am

Regrettably, I haven't checked in here in a while. I'm about two months late to this conversation. I'm trying to follow the recent go-around with Clive and Bill and I am a little confused. There is NO accountability on Brian's part whatsoever. None. Clive, what "conduct" of Brian's do you have an issue with in the days before the boy's death? He was unaware of any discharge instructions from the ER visit from 10 days earlier. He was unaware that the boy had anything other than a fractured clavicle and that Ami was provided instructions specifically stating for her to bring her son back immediately if he was showing any symptoms from the list provided. In fact, Ami told people that the stumbling, etc. was from the boy walking around with the brace on. And Brian was unaware that there was a rechecked scheduled for the earlier on day the boy died.

And to answer your questions:
1 The date Ami moved in with Brian
She never "moved" in. She was staying there on and off but was there the past week more often because her electricity and heat had been turned off in her apartment for non-payment. She could not go to her mother's because her mother was reportedly trying to help the bio father take custody of the kids. Brian went to her apartment, saw the kids sitting on the couch in jackets and there were some candles lit. He had them at his apartment because he felt bad for the kids.

2 Both her children's medical records
Got them. Ami's neglect is clearly documented for both her children and for a period starting long before she ever met Brian. Not enough fingers and toes to count not only the number of sick visits but the number of no-show for wellness checks and follow ups. Disgusting.

3. The medical records for Brian's child
No problems there. Ever.

4. Whether the joint custody order he had with the mother resulted from contested proceedngs and, if so,
Not sure whose joint custody you are referring to? Ami and the bio father for the boy who died who was later awarded custody of the other child?

5. Any grounds advanced against him by the mother
None. Until after the autopsy when she needed to change her story to avoid the spotlight since she was already on the radar of child services.

6. How and when it is suggested the child acquired the skull fracture
According to the state's experts it happened at the time of death, wasn't survivable, had to be the last adult present, etc. All wrong and we are piecing that together now.

7. The cause of death
Well it wasn't "multiple blunt force injuries of the head." Clearly the ME doesn't know the difference between "cause of" and "manner of." Then again, he wasn't actually an appropriately licensed pathologist.

8. What other injuries were observed at autopsy and whether any of them were recent, especially if falling within the period after Ami moved in (which is not stated in the case summary)
Lots of questions as to bruising, etc. which the self proclaimed child abuse expert was miraculously able to time to "at or around the time of death" due to coloring despite the fact that nobody is actually able to do that and certainly not through a few polaroid's. Too much junk science there to get into.

Ami's testimony was scripted as much as she could remember from what the ADA told her. Unfortunately, Brian's attorney didn't bother challenging anything. Not her documented contradicted testimony, not the clearly conflicted medical evidence, not the shotty police "investigation" which generated no actual notes or even signed statements, and not the qualifications or existence of at least one of the state's experts who should never have been allowed to testify. The only question here is who screwed this innocent guy more? Was it the ADA who both hid evidence and created false evidence? Or was it his clown car of attorneys, each one more lazy and incompetent than the one before.
"There is no justice in the courts, only law"
B. Peixoto Family
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 6:53 am
Location: MA

Re: Brian Peixoto Case Discussion

Postby Bill Williams » Mon Jan 16, 2017 12:45 pm

B. Peixoto Family wrote:Regrettably, I haven't checked in here in a while. I'm about two months late to this conversation. I'm trying to follow the recent go-around with Clive and Bill and I am a little confused. There is NO accountability on Brian's part whatsoever. None. Clive, what "conduct" of Brian's do you have an issue with in the days before the boy's death? He was unaware of any discharge instructions from the ER visit from 10 days earlier. He was unaware that the boy had anything other than a fractured clavicle and that Ami was provided instructions specifically stating for her to bring her son back immediately if he was showing any symptoms from the list provided. In fact, Ami told people that the stumbling, etc. was from the boy walking around with the brace on. And Brian was unaware that there was a rechecked scheduled for the earlier on day the boy died.

It's been a while for me too. I know very little of this case, but from your listing of things above, it's always amazing the things which are missed.....
    “The only way I can pay back for what fate and society have handed me is to try, in minor totally useless ways, to make an angry sound against injustice.”
    Martha Gellhorn
Bill Williams
 
Posts: 8044
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 5:49 pm

Re: Brian Peixoto Case Discussion

Postby B. Peixoto Family » Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:51 am

This is a good time for folks to get caught up before we present the new evidence.
www.brianpeixoto.com
You don't have to be a lawyer to see the blatant discrepancies and inconsistencies as to just how unfair this trial really was.
"There is no justice in the courts, only law"
B. Peixoto Family
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 6:53 am
Location: MA

Re: Brian Peixoto Case Discussion

Postby B. Peixoto Family » Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:54 am

Current FB post marking 21 years of this wrongful conviction: https://www.facebook.com/Free-Brian-Pei ... 995577900/

Latest blog: http://brianpeixoto.com/january-2017/
"There is no justice in the courts, only law"
B. Peixoto Family
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 6:53 am
Location: MA

Previous

Return to Brian Peixoto Case

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest