So there has been some action in the Kip and Nicole Macy case. In case you are not aware, here are some of my earlier postings. Essentially, if the allegations are true, these two give scumbag landlords a new name. Fortunately, they were arrested. Whether they will be convicted is another story.
The defense team for Mr. and Mrs. Macy brought motions to dismiss the indictment against the two. It was supposed to be heard on March 30, 2009, at the Courthouse on Bryant Street. However, I have not been able to see what happened.
Judging by the fact that I don't have any comments from the poster whom I presume is Mr. Macy, I would say that either the motion was unsuccessful, has been taken under submission by the judge after arguments, or has been continued to another date. Basically, sorry but I can't help you. Believe me I would love to tell you, because now its like a cliff hanger for me.
All I can provide you with for now is the motions brought by Kip and Nicole Macy's attorneys. Remembering, this is their argument. The DA will presumably have filed their own response. In reading through these, its interesting that what they say is that they are all but admitting to civil wrongs in trying to evade the criminal ones.
But perhaps that is just my interpretation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It seems to me that anonymity is anathema to you. Seeing as that is the case, why don't you tell us who you are so that we readers can know that you aren't one of the many civil stakeholders in this case.
From reading the motions you linked to it appears that the "tenants" (in quotes as their legal status appears to be somewhat ambiguous) have admitted to the commission of fraud, trespassing, theft, and in the case of the lead plaintiff, Douglas, committed perjury during the grand jury itself. Evidently none of these acts are interesting to prosecute in the eyes of the prosecutor. As a tenant, what I find *most* precious about tenant attorneys in San Francisco, is the fact that all of these actions are alright by you, so long as they're taken against a landlord.
Keep up the good work.
Post a Comment