James Holmes rulings: See admissible dating profiles, read cops' account of his comments
Aurora theater shooting case Judge Carlos Samour has issued several rulings related to motions seeking to suppress evidence in the case.
The motions were filed by attorneys for suspect James Holmes and they request that certain evidence, including Holmes's online dating profiles and statements he made to the police after being arrested, not be shown to the jury.
Here's a look at TMZ screen captures featuring the dating profiles. The first is from Adult Friend Finder....
...while the second is from Match.com:
Both profiles ask the question, "Will you visit me in prison?" Judge Samour determined that the dating profiles will be admissible.
Samour's order about the police statements is especially notable because it includes a narrative of what officers say happened when they arrested and questioned Holmes. The judge ruled that statements Holmes made after he invoked his right to an attorney cannot be admitted at trial.
Here's an excerpt from Samour's order, which you can read in its entirety below. This part of the order describes what happened when police detectives questioned Holmes, based on testimony those detectives recently gave in court. (The copy of Samour's order provided to the public is redacted, and we've noted those redactions.)
The Aurora Century 16, where the July 20 attack took place.
At 2:44 in the morning, more than two hours after the shooting, Detectives Mehl and Appel interviewed the defendant at the Aurora Police Department. ...Continue to read Samour's entire order, which includes a narrative of what officers say happened when they encountered Holmes outside the theater.
At the beginning of the interview, as the detectives walked into the room, they greeted the defendant, introduced themselves, and informed him that they wanted to talk to him. After asking the defendant, as "a favor," to move to a different chair in the room, Detective Appel inquired if he needed anything to drink, such as water or pop. This was an attempt to make sure the defendant was as comfortable as possible. The defendant asked for water, and one of the detectives requested that an officer bring the defendant a cup of water.
Once the defendant was seated, Detective Mehl introduced himself and Detective Appel again. He then asked the defendant for his name, the spelling of his last name, and his date of birth. Detective Mehl asked these questions as part of the normal booking process and to learn with whom he was speaking.
The defendant provided the biographical information requested. (sentence redacted) Detective Appel asked him: "Jim, you okay? Uh, I, I mean is there anything we should know about? Are you injured or anything other than some scrapes? Anything?" The defendant answered "no."
Detective Mehl next inquired if the defendant needed anything other than water. This was a continuing effort by the detectives to ensure the defendant was comfortable. (sentence redacted) Detective Appel asked him if he wanted a fan brought into the room to "get some air circulating." The defendant answered "no, it's fine," and Detective Mehl followed up by asking if he was "good to talk with [them]," if he was "having trouble breathing," and if he needed them "to get [him] some help."
Although Detective Mehl was referring to medical help, the defendant asked, "help -- as in counsel?" Detective Mehl heard "counseling," instead of "counsel," and replied as follows: "No, no. As in make sure you're okay physically. The paramedics check you out, are you okay there? You good to talk to us?"
The defendant answered in the affirmative, at which point Detective Mehl informed the defendant that, "by the mere fact" that they were at the police department, the detectives had "to get a couple things out of the way" before they could question him. The detective added that he was going to read something to the defendant, and if the defendant had questions, he should feel free to ask them.
As Detective Mehl was about to start reading the defendant his Miranda rights, the following exchange took place:
(block of text redacted)
(redacted): Okay, let me read this to you and then, then I'll answer the questions that you might have. Fair enough? Okay? Um, again, if you have any questions about this, feel free to ask. Number one, you have the right...
DEFENDANT: Miranda ... rights.
DETECTIVE MEHL: Yeah, yeah, exactly. It's a formality that we go through by the mere fact that you're at the police department here, okay.
Detective Mehl proceeded to read the defedant his Miranda rights. In the middle of the advisement, when Detective Mehl asked the defendant if he understood that he had the right to talk to a lawyer and to have the lawyer present while being questioned, the defendant asked, "how do I get a lawyer?" The detective replied that they would talk about that.
At the end of the advisement, when the detective asked the defendant if, having these rights in mind, he wished to talk to them, the defendant said that he wanted to "invoke the Sixth Amendment." The detective asked him if he was invoking his right to counsel, and the defendant answered, "yeah." The detectives acknowledged the response, but asked the defendant three additional questions about whether there were any other suspects involved in the shooting at the theater. The defendant answered all three questions:
(block of text redacted)