Just wondering. Is it normal practice in the US courts for a trial not to be in session on Mondays?
Seems very peculiar to me. In the UK, courtroom trials take place every day midweek. On rare occasions, they can be in session at the weekend.
Why is Monday an extra day off for the justice system in Utah?
Or does the Mormon Church completely own and rule in Utah?

Why would a church care about court on a Monday?

For the record, trial resumes Tuesday. See here:
http://www.ksl.com/?sid=27421140&nid=148&title=former-mistress-expected-to-resume-testimony-in-macneill-trial-tuesday&fm=home_page&s_cid=queue-15

Oftentimes Mondays are used as a day for functions that don't face the jury and for the principals involved to get caught up on outside-the-courtroom duties.

For all the legitimate gripes about the lds church (particularly in Utah), not having testimony in court on a Monday has nothing to do with the lds in this case.

Sounds like a simple house keeping function. Maybe the judge has to go to the dentist or something. Maybe they have other tasks to accomplish?

this is standard operating procedure. The judge has a docket of cases that still need managed even though he/she is in trial. Monday's are typically the days that courts reserve for hearing and motions on all the cases in their dockets.

This was my experience in Ventura County, California. I was on the jury for a civil trial. We spread 17 days of the trial over five weeks. Mondays were housekeeping days for the entire system.

There was one capital case that was in the penalty phase for the second time that did convene on Monday for deliberation only, but even that was only done at the unanimous request of the jurors.

That was also my experience, since the earliest in the week I had to show up for jury duty was on a Tuesday.

Judges are ex-barbers, and old habits are hard to break.

Why did the Mormon judge, when the prosecuting lawyer mentioned the importance and evidential significance of the proposed Temple Marriage in the relationship between Martin McNeill and Gypsy Willis, swiftly intervene and refuse any further comment on it?

The judge completely ignored the prosecuting lawyers plea to include it as important and relevant evidence in their case.

Yet another blatant example of how the Mormon church and its secretive belief system is enjoying a great deal of intent and careful protection from their priesthood judge!

Hie to Utah folks - the great Mormon theocratic utopia!

The judge simply may not have agreed that the issue as "important and relevant". I am not convinced the judge was biased. This issue is motive and I don't think the issue of a Temple Marriage is relevant. The fact that he used his wifes funeral date as their "wedding date" is far more damning.

A Temple Marriage is far more important to the participants than a normal public church or civil wedding. The prosecuting lawyer was attempting to explain the depth of the supposed commitment of Martin and Gypsy by highlighting its eternal nature and its significance to those involved.
I think it was indeed very relevant!

Actually is was asked because the prosecutors wanted to show how far they went to make their marriage an actual reality. They asked if Gypsy had previously been married and was it in a temple. When she said yes, they were trying to establish that she went so far as to cancel her previous sealing so she could marry Martin. I wished they had asked even more about that! Because obviously is was not going to be a reality for them since they were having an affair to begin with! Delusional!! And the judge is being biased. This is utah! Anything less would be a crime in the mormon's eyes.

There seems to be very little mention of Mormonism in this trial. It might well be significant that the Mormon culture is involved, as death is considered superior to divorce. Especially when a temple marriage is in question.

I wish someone would point out that he'd have two "eternal companions" in the next life.

In the Martin McNeill trial today, the prosecuting lawyer had Gypsy Willis read out the letters she was receiving while in prison, from Martin McNeil. The letters showed just how much McNeill was infatuated with her and how she reciprocated this in her replies to him.
Clearly the letters showed that McNeill was deeply in love with her, and this was the main thrust of the Prosecution in proving motive for McNeill's alleged murder of his wife.
Yet early on in the trial, when the Prosecuting lawyer wanted to highlight the love McNeil had for Gypsy, by his desire to have a future Temple marriage with her, the judge abruptly stopped any further dialogue or questioning on the matter. When the prosecuting lawyer attempted to explain to the judge the significance of this, and marriage in relation to the Temple, the judge refused their perfectly relevant and legitimate evidence.
Surely, it is a serious situation, where we have a judge who also happens to be a Mormon, dismissing particular and relevant evidence, which is proving such an important factor and probable proof of motive in this trial, because of oaths and allegiance promised in another place.
Surely the most important role of a judge is his complete impartiality, the defence and protection of truth and to be untainted by any outside influence or pressure. Yet in his abrupt intervention of the prosecuting lawyers at that time, and their evidence in regards to the love between McNeil and Gypsy, the judge point blank refused any testimony or dialogue when it began to touch on the highly significant importance of temples and marriage between Mormon couples.
Yet today in court, the letters and their content, highlighting again McNeil's deep love for Willis and motive for his alleged murder of his wife, was permitted and heard as evidence, unhindered and without any interference on this occasion.
Sorry, but in my opinion, I think there is something institutionally rotten in the state of Utah.

I had the same thought while watching the trial today.

I think the jurors are going to be very disturbed when they find out about the evidence that has been excluded by the judge. The identity theft, temple marriage plans, drowning brother, the son's suicide, he changed his will to leave his children $1 each and the rest to Gypsy, the list goes on. To me, the most significant RELEVANT exclusions are the identity theft (using his daughter Gillian's name) and Gypsy's request for a sealing cancellation. It's bullshit.

I honestly think Gypsy was an accomplice in this murder. Someone cleaned up that house (all the towels in the bathroom were wet and either in the garage or laundry room, I forget) before MacNeill and Ada came home. It could have been Martin, but it also could have been his whore.

I firmly believe they are both Malignant Narcissistic Sociopaths.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/08/2013 03:51PM by Never Mo In Florida.

It's a good thing I am not on that jury. What an evil man.

I'm enjoying watching him emote while Gypsy tells the court how she only cared about getting his letters because jail was such a lonely place and that she has a new boyfriend. I'd sure love to know what was going through his mind as she was up there dissing, dismissing, and discarding him.

If McNeill was so in love with Willis that he suggested Temple marriage, then taking into account the deep significance of this to Mormons, could this not be a motive in and of itself in the alleged murder of his Wife?
Was McNeill not still a respected figure in the Mormon church and community in April 2007, when the incident took place? He had been a bishop, paid tithing and actually yelled all this out, when he "found" his wife in the bath.
It would seem that his standing in the Mormon church was still important to him at that time.
As he was obviously in love with Willis and desired to marry her in the Temple, in his troubled mind, how would he be able to do this and still remain true and faithful to his Mormon beliefs, temple oaths and standing in the church, if he was still temple married to his wife?
Could the importance of his suggested temple marriage to Willis and all that entails, not have been a much more significant factor for motivation in the alleged murder of his wife?
The fact that the Mormon Judge would not allow the Prosecuting lawyers to pursue the significance of this in their initial evidence, could be seen by some, as a Mormon judge being influenced by his own "sacred" church oaths, in his perceived protection of "sacred" laws and doctrine as it relates to Temple oaths and marriage.
There seems to be a suspicious undercurrent of non disclosure and influence in respect to the deep underlying significance of Mormonism in the lives of the main participants in this trial.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/08/2013 05:02AM by flyinghigh.

In many US jurisdictions, Mondays are set aside for the judge to hear motions, etc. Fridays are set aside for sentencing.

With the jury now out, it's not looking good for McNeill. His defence attorney I felt was not convincing in his summing up while the second prosecuting attorney seemed to be very thorough in his bringing together of all the pieces of evidence re- motive for murder.
Although he is responsible for the death of his wife and and also the serious emotional problems and personal pain suffered by his children over many years, I feel a sense of pity for him to some degree, as he himself is suffering from chronic mental dysfunction, delusion and serious personality disorders.
It would seem that this was inherited from his family, some of whom suffered from similar emotional disorders and personal pain.
Such a tragedy for everyone involved. We can only hope the family can somehow put this terrible nightmare behind them and manage to go forward with their lives as best they can under such heartbreaking circumstances.

No. No rationalizing about phantom inherited disorders. This man is responsible for his life and actions. He had many options available to him not many have the privilege of choosing from. Enough with the inherited model of emotional disturbance. There is absolutely zero evidence of the biological/medical model of mental/emotional disturbance. We all respond to the experience and traumas of life differently. Doesn't mean we're broken, and it doesn't mitigate the cruelty we choose to inflict on others, especially when our position is so clearly financially and culturally privileged to begin with. Sorry - just an opinion based upon my life in close association with emotional and mental suffering on a many-tiered, familial level.

He is suffering from chronic selfishness which is not inherited as far as I know.

He does the selfish and amoral things he does because it has worked for him, at least up to now. That may be about to change.

Come to think of it, the TR worthiness interview doesn't ask if you've murdered anyone.

Do you think the Morg will take a hit if McNeill gets off with this?
After all he was a controlling and manipulating scumbag to Michelle, with the kids suffering from all sorts of emotional and damaging psychological problems, ending in pain and tragedy.
During all of this time he would have been an active member of the Mormon church, a doctor and lawyer and no doubt held in high esteem.
How much, if any, did his church leaders know regarding his cruel behaviour and treatment of his wife and family?
Depending in what they knew, could they be considered complicit to some degree in their omission to intervene? The church remember is also controlling and manipulative and in that respect are also guilty of the psychological control of its members.

Thomas S. Monson should have been dragged screaming up to the stand and cross examined about the deep psychological damage the Mormon church has systematically inflicted upon its members - like Martin McNeill.