The same lawyer who did not file a change of venue in the Bullock case is the Judge who will hear a motion for change of venue in the Kitchen case

The lawyer who represented Gary Bullock is now Judge Kaleb Cockrum. The lawyer who did not file a change of venue in the Bullock case is the Judge assigned to the Marci Kitchen case and will hear a motion for change of venue in this case.



In a few previous posts, I mentioned that there have been other cases with a lot of publicity and  with strong emotions like Jason Warren and Gary Bullock. There was no motion for change of venue filed in either case. Extensive voir dire in both cases resulted in two excellent juries.

Trial confirmation is scheduled for Marci Kitchen this morning. Both attorneys have filed proposed jury questionnaires and motions in limine by the August 6 deadline. Jury trial is scheduled for September 4.

While the defense has filed a motion to change venue, they can and are expected to file a supplemental motion on August 24. According to the last court hearing, the defense expert should conclude investigation by August 23. The hearing on the motion to change venue is scheduled for August 27.


From law.com:

voir dire : "the questioning of prospective jurors by a judge and attorneys in court. Voir dire is used to determine if any juror is biased and/or cannot deal with the issues fairly, or if there is cause not to allow a juror to serve (knowledge of the facts; acquaintanceship with parties, witnesses or attorneys; occupation which might lead to bias; prejudice against the death penalty; or previous experiences such as having been sued in a similar case). Actually one of the unspoken purposes of the voir dire is for the attorneys to get a feel for the personalities and likely views of the people on the jury panel. In some courts the judge asks most of the questions, while in others the lawyers are given substantial latitude and time to ask questions. Some jurors may be dismissed for cause by the judge, and the attorneys may excuse others in "peremptory" challenges without stating any reason. 2) questions asked to determine the competence of an alleged expert witness. 3) any hearing outside the presence of the jury held during trial."

Recent posts:

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2018/08/conflict-counsel-and-da-file-motions-in.html?m=1

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2018/08/unfortunately-we-were-expecting-this.html?m=1

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2018/08/i-had-already-written-weeks-back-about.html?m=1

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2018/07/brief-motion-to-continue-marci-kitchen.html?m=1#more

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2018/07/marci-kitchen-intervention-today-to.html?m=1

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2018/07/motion-for-continuance-or-change-in.html?m=1

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2018/07/another-twist-in-marci-kitchen-jury.html?m=1