• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Kim Dillon Trial Starts

"Dillon's legal team argued that she merely stepped out to check her voicemail"
A weak argument.
Voicemail isn't going anywhere soon.

"At the time, Dillon was exhausted and had taken fertility drugs, Xanax and Zoloft to deal with ongoing health problems, they said."
Not going there.

With that said, Ms Dillon is innocent unless proven guilty, beyond reasonable doubt.

I was curious to her case file at Maricopa County Superior Court and looked it up.
The eyes began glazing over until an entry dated 12/21/06:
12/21/2006 MIL - Motion In Limine 12/21/2006
NOTE: eFile Id 38013 -- TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF MIKE CHAMBERLAIN

Gee, what might Chambo know?
There is no indication of who filed the motion, albeit Defense or Prosecution.


http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/docket/criminal/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2005-012739
 
desertskies said:
12/21/2006 MIL - Motion In Limine 12/21/2006
NOTE: eFile Id 38013 -- TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF MIKE CHAMBERLAIN
Click to expand...


Not sure what it's all about either, or if it's on behalf of the prosecution or the defense, but could it mean that 1) Chambo can ignore having to appear, or 2) whatever he says can be thrown out, because his name is misspelled (Chamberlin, not Chamberlain) on the court docket?
 
oldiesfan6479 said:
desertskies said:
12/21/2006 MIL - Motion In Limine 12/21/2006
NOTE: eFile Id 38013 -- TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF MIKE CHAMBERLAIN
Click to expand...


Not sure what it's all about either, or if it's on behalf of the prosecution or the defense, but could it mean that 1) Chambo can ignore having to appear, or 2) whatever he says can be thrown out, because his name is misspelled (Chamberlin, not Chamberlain) on the court docket?
Click to expand...


I'm involved with a case and my name is misspelled on the subpoena.
Maricopa County attorneys office tells me that that doesn't matter.
The subpoena requires one to show up, or at the least, keep contact with the court in case testimony is required.

An added bonus is the line "IF YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AS ORDERED, A WARRANT WILL BE ISSUED FOR YOUR ARREST"

Name misspelled or not, it gets your attention and makes one keep contact with the County attorneys office.
 
Nurse Jeff and I are surprised Dillon's defense attorney didn't cite the change of her hair color as a reason for causing clothes to walk. At KNXV 15, Kim was a brunette. When she moved to OprahChannel 3, she was a bottled blonde. Those chemicals can do a number on one's brain cells...just look at Brittney! But hey, what jury is going to convict a pregnant women? Call in the County DA and let's make a deal!
 
Dr, I would like to comment but I'm at Target doing some "shopping".
I have to check my voice mail but the incandescent lights are causing havoc on my reception.
I have to step outside.
Wow, nice shirt...I want it.
Oh look, time to take some medication.
I'm so stressed.

Don't compare Britney's past actions to Ms Dillon's past actions.
Not wearing panties, with a short skirt, is not against the law and punishable by possible jail time.

If Ms Dillon did that she'd have many phone numbers to choose from...from male and female.

If Ms Dillon and her attorneys were on the ball, they'd subpoena the original purchase records of the items involved.
Look at what Dillard's paid for the merchandise as opposed to what Dillard's is charging the public.
That is the true loss.
Not a speculative price with a 300% margin. That's considered mark up.
Keyword: SPECULATIVE.

I purchase 500 pairs of Levi jeans at $11.00/each (spent $5,500).
I put the jeans on the floor at $33.00/each (speculative income of $16,500)
The initial loss is what I paid. Not my mark up.

I'm not condoning what Ms Dillon is accused of.
I don't agree with the defense that this Beverly Hills attorney is using either.
Check the voice mail and by the way, I have some medical needs.

Uh huh.

Read into it what you will.
They're called "clearance centers"

Give it some thought.
 
True journalists would know not to mess with Dillard's! They have a history of severely punishing shoplifters -- including killing them. If they don't physically hurt them, they are known for going to court -- even if they never recover any monies. Of course, there would probably be much less shoplifting if every chain took it that seriously.

That being said, Kim Dillon has NO EXCUSE whatsoever for this type of behavior.

Most other department stores would have come to a "settlement", particularly when it involved a local celebrity. She would have quietly paid them back and they would have quietly banished her from their stores. It certainly would not have gone to court.
 
formeraa said:
True journalists would know not to mess with Dillard's! They have a history of severely punishing shoplifters -- including killing them. If they don't physically hurt them, they are known for going to court -- even if they never recover any monies. Of course, there would probably be much less shoplifting if every chain took it that seriously.
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate?
 
Sure! They were known in Texas to severly punish/prosecute shoplifters beyond what would be considered reasonable. There were at least a couple of mysterious deaths that occurred. The mainstream media ignored most of this -- on the grounds that shoplifters should be punished. Plus, Dillard's in Texas is considered an upstanding corporate citizen.

However, the alternative newspapers had several articles over the years. It's all out there if journalists want to dig into it.

Please understand that I believe that shoplifters should be prosecuted (multiple time offenders) and/or make proper restitution (first time offenders). But it was pretty clear that Dillard's stepped over the line in certain cases.
 
On 24 January during his 6:00 p.m. show, Crummey talked with Greg Paul regarding Dillon's trial. Did anyone catch the entire segment?
 
brian4 said:
On 24 January during his 6:00 p.m. show, Crummey talked with Greg Paul regarding Dillon's trial. Did anyone catch the entire segment?
Click to expand...

Nurse Jeff and I caught The Evil One discussing it with Greg Paul, who has been covering the trial for KFWhyEYE. Crummey said it'd be hard to argue with the videotape, but with the high $$ defense hired by Dillon, she'll probably get off. The cost of the pilfered clothing - $400. The buzz created by the trial - priceless!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom