# Vegas Paul



## Rider Rick

Any word on Paul?


----------



## cda

looks like a court date of 5-25, maybe prelim only though


----------



## FM William Burns

Cda,

Any updated articles from those last year?

FMWB


----------



## cda

Have not seen any, but you are talking about LA


----------



## mark handler

cda said:
			
		

> Have not seen any, but you are talking about LA


NO.

Orange County

The latest news stories were in December


----------



## cda

LA / orange county all the same minus the orange trees that use to be there

Old question where does LA start?


----------



## mark handler

cda said:
			
		

> LA / orange county all the same


Not        .


----------



## peach

almost forgot about him; keep us posted if you hear anything.


----------



## mtlogcabin

Looks like a jury trial on March 22, 2013


*Case Number: *10CF3053

:history.go(0)'>Printable Version 
	




* OC Pay Number: *6386931

* Originating Court: *Central

* Defendant: *Curry, Paul Marshal





Demographics...


*Eyes: *Brown

*Hair: *Brown

*Height (ft/in): *6'0"

*Weight (lbs): *190






Names...

One name found.*1* 
Last Name

First Name

Middle Name

Type

Curry

Paul

Marshal

Real Name



* Case Status: *Open




Details...


*Case Stage: *-

*Release Status: *Remanded

*DMV Hold: *N

*Charging Document: *Information

*Mandatory Appearance: *Y

*Amendment #: *0




Case InfoHearing Info

Release Info

Sentencing




*Scheduled Hearings *

One hearing found.*1* 
Date

Time

Hearing Type - Reason

Courtroom

03/22/2013

09:00 AM

Jury Trial -

C30




​


----------



## cda

Man 2013!!!!!


----------



## jpranch

Thanks for the update MT.


----------



## Durant

Good Grief,

Arrested on Novemember 9, 2010, locked up and don't go to trial until March 22, 2013.  What happened to that old speedy trial rumor they used to talk about?  Ain't that about 2 1/2 years in jail without a trial?

Hope I don't get accused of anything.


----------



## cda

That is the court system now a days

Or county is on about a year delay

I do not know why speedy trail is not brought up more often


----------



## Inspector Gift

Paul Marshal Curry

Case Number: 10CF3053

Case Status: OPEN

03/22/2013 09:00 AM Jury Trial - Canceled

Next Scheduled Hearing:

05/24/2013 09:00 AM - Further Proceedings


----------



## fatboy

Thanks for the update Terre.........


----------



## Inspector Gift

Paul has had 18 hearings so far and the next is scheduled for August 2, 2013.

Case Number: 10CF3053

Defendant: Curry, Paul Marshal

Date Time 08/02/2013 09:00 AM

Hearing Type - Reason: Further Proceedings

Courtroom - C30

https://ocapps.occourts.org/Vision_Public/DisplayHearingInfo.do


----------



## RJJ

WOW! Seems like just the other day I chatted with him in Baltimore!


----------



## Daddy-0-

Or Denver for me when the ICC seemed like they wanted to fix their messes!


----------



## cda

Daddy-0- said:
			
		

> Or Denver for me when the ICC seemed like they wanted to fix their messes!


They got that fixed, right??


----------



## Inspector Gift

Update on the status of Paul's case: "Further Proceedings - Cancel"

Next appearance: 09/06/2013

Case Summary

Case Number: 	10CF3053

OC Pay Number: 	6386931

Originating Court: Superior Court of California - Orange County - Central

Defendant: 	Curry, Paul Marshal

Case Status:

	Status: 	Open

	Case Stage:

	Release Status: 	Remanded

	Warrant: 	N

	DMV Hold : 	N

	Charging Document: 	Information

	Mandatory Appearance: 	Y

	Owner's Resp: 	N

	Amendment #: 	0

Scheduled Hearing:

	Date	Hearing Type - Reason	Courtroom

	09/06/2013	Pre Trial Trial Setting Conference	C30


----------



## Uncle Bob

If they can't find him guilty; they have already destroyed his life.  He was arrested on the assumption they had enough proof to go to trial.  Flies in the face of the Sixth amendment right to speedy trial.


----------



## RJJ

Well there must be a lot more to this issue then we can see from the papers. He has been held without bail so may be considered a flight risk. Also, don't know if his attorney has stalled this case for discovery.


----------



## cda

I don't understand why speedy trail is not brought up more often

I know around here it may be a year before someone goes to trial


----------



## RJJ

It is because the silver tongue suits need to charge for their time!


----------



## fatboy

I would say the speedy trial issue would be based on who is dragging it out.......


----------



## cda

three years setting there, and appears another hearing in March 2014


----------



## jpranch

There is something very, very wrong and broken when your locked up for 3 years and still have not had a trial.


----------



## jpranch

Update from June 2013

http://www.metnews.com/articles/2013/curry062613.htm

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1636690.html


----------



## RJJ

Well a fair amount of detail!


----------



## kilitact

jpranch said:
			
		

> Update from June 2013http://www.metnews.com/articles/2013/curry062613.htm
> 
> http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1636690.html


Thanks for the info. It appears he has court appointed lawyers, dragging it out to give them time to figure a defence?


----------



## High Desert

https://ocapps.occourts.org/Vision_Public/DisplayHearingInfo.do#searchResults


----------



## High Desert

The link didn't come through. If you go to Orange County Superior Court and put in this case number 10CF3053, you can find the info.


----------



## cda

Date	Time	Hearing Type - Reason	Courtroom

08/15/2014	09:00 AM	Motion -	C41

08/25/2014	09:00 AM	Jury Trial -	C41


----------



## fatboy

Well, it looks like he will finally get his day in court...............


----------



## ICE

Everything that I've read leaves plenty of questions.

How was the poison administered?

Are there any links between Mr. Curry and nicotine?

Is there any evidence at all?

The forensic test was completed a year after her death and the pathologist determined that the nicotine was administered within two hours of death.  That seems remarkable.  The same expert can't say how the nicotine was administered or what form it was.  Only that it was either injected or eaten.  Are there any needle marks?  What does it taste like?  What would it take to eat it....and how much?

The circumstantial evidence indicates that she was murdered. People don't accidentally OD on nicotine. Mr. Curry garnered $400K upon her death. A former boyfriend of the decedant stated that Mr. Curry attempted to up the life insurance to one million....but that is just one guy who may not be telling the truth.


----------



## ICE

deleted duplicate


----------



## Rider Rick

Tiger,

If Paul didn't kill her who did?


----------



## ICE

Rider Rick said:
			
		

> Tiger,If Paul didn't kill her who did?


He is entitled to the status of innocent until proven guilty.  He is perhaps the only suspect, but short of a confession in conjunction with other evidence, it will be tough to convict him.  His best move is to get a trial by a judge, not a jury.

If he did the deed, he planned it over a period of years.  Shirley there was an escape plan.  It wouldn't make sense to kill her, collect a jackpot and go directly to jail.

It is hard to believe that a person with such a passion for code officiating could also be a cold, calculating killer of his spouse.


----------



## Rider Rick

(It is hard to believe that a person with such a passion for code officiating could also be a cold, calculating killer of his spouse.)

Tiger,

It happens everyday.


----------



## High Desert

"Oh, he was such a nice boy. He used to mow my lawn and go to the grocery store for me" Quote from Ted Bundy's elderly neighbor.


----------



## pwood

just watched a report on Paul on Good Morning America this morning. He made the big time! He had a beautiful wife and what appeared to be a beautiful life. If he did the deed he should share eternity with the ISIS dbags.


----------



## fatboy

Here it is;

http://abcnews.go.com/US/husband-trial-decades-wifes-poisoning-death/story?id=25242935


----------



## mjesse

Interesting

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/husband-arrested-allegedly-poisoning-wife-1994-25243032?tab=9482931&section=1206833


----------



## RJJ

Wow! The last time I saw Paul was in Baltimore. Shortly after that he went to Jail.


----------



## fatboy

Yeah, I saw him in Denver for the ICC Code forum conversation around that time also....


----------



## conarb

This was on *AOL this morning*.  He's got to be innocent.


----------



## fatboy

conarb said:
			
		

> This was on *AOL this morning*.  He's got to be innocent.


Why is he innocent? I'm not saying he is guilty, but for whatever reason, they seem to have secured/observed some evidence that made it worthwhile to bring it forward again.

If that is the case, and he did or didn;t do it, this is their only shot, other than appeals, because double jeopardy will kick in now.


----------



## conarb

Fatboy said:
			
		

> Why is he innocent? I'm not saying he is guilty, but for whatever  reason, they seem to have secured/observed some evidence that made it  worthwhile to bring it forward again.


Of course nobody but Paul knows, when taking moot court in law school we were taught that "all criminal defendants are guilty", prosecutors are under a lot of political pressure to solve cases, many times if they can't pin it on somebody they will go after whomever they can, even if they at times convict innocent people.  with DNA evidence today *The Innocence Project* has found many convicted people to be innocent.


----------



## cda

Made nancy grace  on 9/8

Had more details


----------



## mark handler

Man accused of poisoning wife with nicotine, collecting $400K







Paul Marshal Curry listens in court Tuesday during his murder trial. Deputy Public Defender Lisa Kopelman sits by his side. (Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times)

ormer nuclear power plant engineer accused of poisoning his wife with nicotine more than two decades ago was driven by greed and a "complete and utter disregard for human life," a prosecutor told jurors Tuesday.

Paul M. Curry, 57, could face life in prison if he is convicted of murdering his wife, Linda Curry, who had also worked at the San Onofre nuclear power station.

She was 50 years old when she died mysteriously in June 1994 at the couple's San Clemente home. They had been married just 21 months.

In his opening statement to an Orange County jury Tuesday, prosecutor Ebrahim Baytieh described the defendant as a "very, very, very smart man," adding: "People referred to him as a genius."

In July 1993 and again in December 1993, Linda Curry became ill and had to be hospitalized, but doctors were unable to determine the source of her illness, the prosecutor said.

She became suspicious of her husband and removed him as the beneficiary on a life insurance policy, naming her sister in his place, the prosecutor said. Yet she did not leave him.

In an interview with police after one of those hospitalizations, Paul Curry described his wife as having a trusting nature.

"She has the ability to sugarcoat everybody's intentions, and nobody has any bad intentions as far as she's concerned," Curry said, in a recording played for jurors. "She sees the good in everybody."

It was a nature that her husband exploited, the prosecutor said.

The prosecutor said Curry had been alone with his wife for hours before he called 911 around midnight on June 9, 1994 to report that he had found her in bed not breathing. Paramedics were unable to revive her.

"She was always, to him, a paycheck from Day One," the prosecutor said.

Prosecutors said that Curry managed to collect $400,000 on her life insurance policies.

Curry was remarried and living in Salina, Kan., when Orange County sheriff's deputies arrested him 2010 in connection with the death, the prosecutor said.

At the time of his wife's death, Curry told The Times that his wife was a nonsmoker and that he was puzzled by the conclusion that she'd died as a result of nicotine poisoning.


----------



## cda

mark handler said:
			
		

> Man accused of poisoning wife with nicotine, collecting $400K
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Marshal Curry listens in court Tuesday during his murder trial. Deputy Public Defender Lisa Kopelman sits by his side. (Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times)
> 
> ormer nuclear power plant engineer accused of poisoning his wife with nicotine more than two decades ago was driven by greed and a "complete and utter disregard for human life," a prosecutor told jurors Tuesday.
> 
> Paul M. Curry, 57, could face life in prison if he is convicted of murdering his wife, Linda Curry, who had also worked at the San Onofre nuclear power station.
> 
> She was 50 years old when she died mysteriously in June 1994 at the couple's San Clemente home. They had been married just 21 months.
> 
> In his opening statement to an Orange County jury Tuesday, prosecutor Ebrahim Baytieh described the defendant as a "very, very, very smart man," adding: "People referred to him as a genius."
> 
> In July 1993 and again in December 1993, Linda Curry became ill and had to be hospitalized, but doctors were unable to determine the source of her illness, the prosecutor said.
> 
> She became suspicious of her husband and removed him as the beneficiary on a life insurance policy, naming her sister in his place, the prosecutor said. Yet she did not leave him.
> 
> In an interview with police after one of those hospitalizations, Paul Curry described his wife as having a trusting nature.
> 
> "She has the ability to sugarcoat everybody's intentions, and nobody has any bad intentions as far as she's concerned," Curry said, in a recording played for jurors. "She sees the good in everybody."
> 
> It was a nature that her husband exploited, the prosecutor said.
> 
> The prosecutor said Curry had been alone with his wife for hours before he called 911 around midnight on June 9, 1994 to report that he had found her in bed not breathing. Paramedics were unable to revive her.
> 
> "She was always, to him, a paycheck from Day One," the prosecutor said.
> 
> Prosecutors said that Curry managed to collect $400,000 on her life insurance policies.
> 
> Curry was remarried and living in Salina, Kan., when Orange County sheriff's deputies arrested him 2010 in connection with the death, the prosecutor said.
> 
> At the time of his wife's death, Curry told The Times that his wife was a nonsmoker and that he was puzzled by the conclusion that she'd died as a result of nicotine poisoning.


Where are you finding the updates?


----------



## ICE

He will walk.


----------



## mark handler

cda said:
			
		

> Where are you finding the updates?


Google News,

I also saw a story on the TV news tonight


----------



## mark handler

ICE said:
			
		

> He will walk.


They have no evidence that he did it


----------



## High Desert

mark handler said:
			
		

> They have no evidence that he did it


Don't be too sure of that. They withold a lot of stuff until the trial gets going. They had enough evidence to charge him, so they must have something. I'm not saying he did it or not, that will come out in the trial.


----------



## fatboy

Seems like anything they can come up with would be pretty weak after 20 years.


----------



## north star

*= + = +*





> "Seems like anything they can come up with would be pretty weak after 20 years."


Maybe not so much.......Afterall, this is a murder trial.   

*+ = + =*


----------



## mark handler

CURRY v. SUPERIOR COURT

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1636690.html

Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, California.

Paul Marshal CURRY, Petitioner, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of Orange County, Respondent; The People, Real Party in Interest.

G047000

Decided: June 25, 2013

Frank Ospino, Public Defender, Jean Wilkinson, Chief Deputy Public Defender, Mark S. Brown, Assistant Public Defender, and Martin F. Schwarz, Deputy Public Defender, for Petitioner. Tony Rackauckas, District Attorney, and Matthew Lockhart, Deputy District Attorney, for Real Party in Interest.

OP I N I O N

Petitioner Paul Marshal Curry stands accused of murdering his wife Linda for financial gain by means of poison.   Although Linda died in 1994, petitioner was not charged until 2010, after forensic testing confirmed Linda, a nonsmoker, had lethal levels of nicotine in her system when she died.   At the preliminary hearing, a homicide investigator with no specialized scientific training testified about the forensic evidence forming the basis for the prosecution's case.   Over petitioner's objection, the investigator was also allowed to convey the expert opinions of two doctors who believe Linda died from nicotine poisoning.   Petitioner contends the investigator's lack of knowledge about the scientific evidence and expert opinions he conveyed rendered his testimony unreliable, and therefore he should not have been bound over for trial.   We disagree and deny his petition for relief.

FACTS

Petitioner and Linda met while working at the San Onofre nuclear power plant in the late 1980's.   They got married in 1992, and a short time later they had a barbeque at their house that Linda's boss and his wife Betty Reeder attended.   At the barbeque, Reeder heard petitioner boast that he could kill a person without being apprehended.   Specifically, he claimed he could make a deadly poison in his garage and administer it to someone without ever getting caught.

In 1993, Linda was hospitalized due to severe nausea, vomiting and diarrhea.   Despite extensive testing, her doctors were unable to determine the cause of her illness.   While Linda was in the hospital, the police asked her if she knew anyone who might want to harm her.   She said petitioner might want to kill her because they were having money problems.

Upon her release from the hospital, Linda spoke with her former boyfriend Bill Sandretto.   Linda told Sandretto petitioner wanted her to purchase a $1 million life insurance policy, but she was reluctant to do so.   In fact, she said she didn't even want petitioner to be the beneficiary under her existing policies.   She also told Sandretto that she and petitioner had no sex life.

In January 1994, Linda was hospitalized with the same symptoms, and again doctors were unable to determine their cause.   One of Linda's nurses during that time was Nancy Row. One day, Row spoke with petitioner after she saw him leave Linda's room.   Petitioner told Row that Linda was fine, but a couple of minutes later, Linda's intravenous alarm went off.   Upon responding to Linda's room, Row found her intravenous port broken in an odd way.   Row had never seen a port broken in that manner before, so she called the police.   After interviewing petitioner about the incident, the sheriff's department reported it as a “potential tampering.”

Five months later, in the early morning hours of June 10, 1994, Linda died in her home.   According to petitioner, Linda had said she was feeling tired when she came home from work the night before.   She went to bed around 6:00 p.m., and petitioner joined her there a while later.   Around midnight, petitioner was awakened by their cat and noticed Linda was not breathing.   He called 911, but the responding paramedics were unable to revive her.

Linda's autopsy was performed by Dr. Joseph Halka, a pathologist with the Orange County coroner's office.   Initially, Dr. Halka was unable to determine the cause of Linda's death, but after additional toxicology testing was conducted, he determined she died from nicotine and cadmium poisoning.   He believed the poison was either injected or ingested.

As reflected in Linda's death certificate, Dr. Halka reached that conclusion in 1995.   However, petitioner was not charged until 2010, after still more toxicology testing was done.   Conducted under the supervision of Dr. Neil Benowitz at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF), that testing indicated Linda had a lethal amount of nicotine in her system when she died.   Dr. Benowitz surmised the drug was administered to Linda within two hours of her death, and she likely died from “massive nicotine poisoning.”

In light of these findings, the police tracked down petitioner in Salina, Kansas.   In an interview conducted in November 2010, petitioner told investigators he received about $300,000 from Linda's life insurance policies and another $100,000 or so in stock options and pension benefits.   He also admitted that after Linda died, he made a fraudulent insurance claim on a Rolex watch that belonged to her.  (Petitioner reported the watch had been stolen;  he had actually given it to Linda's sister.)   At the end of the interview, the investigators arrested petitioner for murdering Linda.   When informed that Linda died from nicotine poisoning, petitioner, who admitted Linda did not smoke, said, “I don't know how to respond to this.”

In a complaint filed on November 9, 2010, petitioner was charged with first degree murder and insurance fraud.  (Pen.Code, §§ 187, subd. (a);  550, subd. (a)(1).) 1  Special circumstance allegations the murder was committed by means of poison and for financial gain were also alleged. (§ 190.2, subds.(a)(1) & (a)(19).)

The above evidence was presented at petitioner's preliminary hearing by investigators with the Orange County Sheriff's Department.   Their testimony was based primarily on information they obtained from conducting witness interviews, so much of it was hearsay.   Petitioner does not challenge all of what they had to say.   Rather, he targets the expert opinions of Dr. Halka and Dr. Benowitz and the scientific testing they relied on to formulate their opinions.   Petitioner contends that evidence should have been excluded because the investigator who conveyed it to the court did not know enough about the subject matter of his testimony to ensure it was reliable.

That investigator was Ken Hoffman.   Hoffman has been a peace officer since 1984 and is currently assigned as a homicide investigator with the Orange County Sheriff's Department.   As part of that assignment, Hoffman assisted in the investigation surrounding Linda's death.   At the request of the prosecutor, and in anticipation of petitioner's preliminary hearing, he interviewed Dr. Halka and Dr. Benowitz about their findings and opinions in the case, as reflected in the reports they prepared.   Hoffman had copies of those reports, as well as Dr. Halka's and Dr. Benowitz's resumes, when he interviewed them.

Explaining his interview with Dr. Halka, Hoffman testified he spoke with him by telephone on September 27 and 28, 2011.   Dr. Halka informed him he is a licensed physician and has practiced forensic pathology for nearly 40 years.   He began working as a medical examiner for Orange County in 1986, and in that capacity he has conducted approximately 15,000 autopsies to determine the cause and manner of death.   During that time, he has also testified as an expert witness on those issues.

Dr. Halka told Hoffman that when he conducted Linda's autopsy in 1994, he was initially unable to determine the cause of her death.   Therefore, he ordered special toxicology testing to be performed on samples of Linda's nails, skin, hair, blood, urine and tissue.   That testing was conducted by an outside lab that was under contract with Orange County to perform such testing.   In Dr. Halka's words, this testing went “beyond the standard toxicology and microbiology testing” that is done in most cases.   When the testing data came back, Dr. Halka analyzed the results and determined Linda's death was a homicide.   More specifically, he opined Linda suffered acute pulmonary edema and intoxication from the combined effects of nicotine and cadmium poisoning, and those substances entered her body by means of injection or ingestion.2

On cross-examination, Hoffman admitted he does not have any special scientific training or expertise.   He also admitted he was not present during Linda's autopsy or initially involved with the investigation into her death.   In addition, Hoffman admitted he did not know which lab conducted the toxicology testing Dr. Halka relied on, what type of testing was performed at the lab, or whether proper scientific methods were utilized in the testing process.   Hoffman also conceded he did not ask Dr. Halka if he has worked on any other cases involving nicotine or cadmium poisoning or if he has had any training on how those substances affect the human body.

Although the toxicology testing Dr. Halka relied on to formulate his opinions was “special” and “above the norm,” Hoffman testified it was still not to the level of testing that was conducted by Dr. Benowitz and his team at UCSF. During his investigation, Hoffman learned that when Linda's autopsy was conducted in 1994, samples of her blood and urine were sent to Dr. Benowitz's lab.   The record does not disclose what type of testing Dr. Benowitz conducted or what results he obtained at that time.   However, in 2009, Dr. Benowitz's team retested the samples.   Since this was a key component of the prosecution's case, Hoffman focused on the results of this retesting when he interviewed Dr. Benowitz in preparation for petitioner's preliminary hearing.


----------



## mark handler

By way of background, Dr. Benowitz told Hoffman he has been a professor of medicine and psychiatry at UCSF since 1974 and is currently the head of the school's division of clinical pharmacology and experimental therapeutics.   He holds a California medical license and is certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine in toxicology and clinical pharmacology.   In addition, he has conducted extensive research and published numerous studies and articles on the impact of nicotine on the human body.

Dr. Benowitz informed Hoffman that besides inhalation, nicotine can also enter a person's body by means of ingestion, absorption or injection.   He said that if someone were to soak a cigarette or chewing tobacco in rubbing alcohol, the tobacco could be “reduce[d] ․ down,” and its nicotine-laden contents could then be introduced into a person's system by the latter three means.   And if that were to occur, the person would likely experience an increased heart rate, nausea and vomiting.   Nicotine being a poison, a high dosage could result in death.

Speaking to this case, Dr. Benowitz told Hoffman he supervised his colleagues Dr. Peyton Jacob and research analyst Lisa Yu when Linda's blood and urine samples were retested in 2009.   They used a gas chromatograph with nitrogen phosphorus detection to ascertain the nicotine level in the samples.   Describing this testing procedure as a “well-established scientific method,” Dr. Benowitz told Hoffman his lab utilizes it “quite often.”

To find out more about the testing, Hoffman also spoke to Yu and Dr. Jacob.   Yu said she conducted the actual testing and Dr. Jacob oversaw her work.   Then, once the testing was completed, they met with Dr. Benowitz to discuss and analyze the results.3

According to Dr. Benowitz's report, Linda's test results showed she had a blood nicotine concentration of 1,120 nanograms per milliliter.   Dr. Benowitz told Hoffman that level was “extraordinarily high” and “likely to be fatal.”   In fact, it was three times higher than a prior case he had worked on that involved “extreme nicotine poisoning.”   In light of this finding, Dr. Benowitz opined Linda's death was “consistent with a catastrophic illness as would have been caused by massive nicotine poisoning.”   He also believed the nicotine was introduced into her system within two hours of her death.

On cross-examination, Hoffman admitted he does not know how a gas chromatograph works or exactly how the machine was used to test Linda's blood and urine samples.   He also did not know the last time the equipment in Dr. Benowitz's lab was calibrated or how many nanograms are in a milliliter.   In addition, Hoffman said he did not ask Dr. Benowitz whether he tested Linda's samples for cadmium or how nicotine and cadmium interact in the body.   And even though Dr. Benowitz's report indicated he “modified” the testing method in this case to allow for the “simultaneous extraction of nicotine, cotinine and caffeine,” Hoffman did not ask him if that was a standard modification.   Nor did he ask Dr. Benowitz if he knew the form of nicotine that poisoned Linda (e.g., liquid or solid) or the method by which it was introduced into her system.

Hoffman was aware that Dr. Benowitz's lab receives research grants, contracts for services and does “a lot of different types of things under a lot of different programs.”   However, he did not question Dr. Benowitz in detail about any specific cases he had previously worked on or ask him whether, prior to this case, he had ever conducted an examination to determine the cause of a person's death.   Nor did he ask him what his level of experience was with the injection, ingestion or absorption of nicotine.

During Hoffman's testimony, defense counsel made a continuing objection to the expert opinions he conveyed to the court regarding the cause of Linda's death.   Defense counsel argued Hoffman simply did not have sufficient scientific knowledge to distill the information he received from Dr. Halka and Dr. Benowitz and convey it in a meaningful and reliable fashion.   However, the magistrate denied defense counsel's motion to exclude Dr. Halka's and Dr. Benowitz's expert opinions on that basis.   In light of those opinions, and all of the other information he received, the magistrate determined there was sufficient evidence to bind petitioner over for trial.   Petitioner challenged that ruling by way of a section 995 motion in the trial court, but the motion was denied.   He then filed the present petition for a writ of prohibition/mandate to overturn that decision.   For the reasons explained below, we deny the petition.

DISCUSSION

Petitioner argues the court erred in admitting the expert opinions of Dr. Halka and Dr. Benowitz, and without their opinions there is insufficient evidence to support the charges against him.   The People contend the expert opinions were properly admitted, and even without them, there is sufficient evidence to hold petitioner over for trial.   We believe the magistrate properly admitted the challenged evidence.   Despite Hoffman's lack of scientific training, his testimony was sufficiently reliable to justify the admission of Dr. Halka's and Dr. Benowitz's expert opinions into evidence.


----------



## mark handler

DISCUSSION

Petitioner argues the court erred in admitting the expert opinions of Dr. Halka and Dr. Benowitz, and without their opinions there is insufficient evidence to support the charges against him.   The People contend the expert opinions were properly admitted, and even without them, there is sufficient evidence to hold petitioner over for trial.   We believe the magistrate properly admitted the challenged evidence.   Despite Hoffman's lack of scientific training, his testimony was sufficiently reliable to justify the admission of Dr. Halka's and Dr. Benowitz's expert opinions into evidence.

The purpose of a preliminary hearing is to establish whether there is probable cause to believe the defendant has committed a felony. (§ 866, subd. (b).)  “ ‘ “[P]robable cause is shown if a man (or woman) of ordinary caution or prudence would be led to believe and conscientiously entertain a strong suspicion of the guilt of the accused.” ’  [Citations.]”  (Rideout v. Superior Court (1967) 67 Cal.2d 471, 474.)   That is the sole inquiry.   Guilt or innocence is not determined.   It is not a vehicle for discovery. (§ 866(b);  Whitman v. Superior Court (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1063, 1080–1081 (Whitman),)

In order to streamline the preliminary hearing process, the voters enacted Proposition 115 in 1990.   That measure amended the California Constitution and the Penal Code to allow hearsay evidence at preliminary hearings.  (Whitman, supra, 54 Cal.3d 1063, 1072–1073.)   Although hearsay evidence is generally inadmissible at trial, section 872 states that a finding of probable cause at a preliminary hearing “may be based in whole or in part upon the sworn testimony of a law enforcement officer ․ relating the statements of declarants made out of court offered for the truth of the matter asserted.” (§ 872, subd. (b).)

Section 872 requires the testifying officer either have five years of law enforcement experience or have completed a training course on the investigation and reporting of cases. (§ 872, subd. (b).)  But the statute does not restrict the type of hearsay declarants to which it applies.   Because of this, courts have interpreted section 872 broadly to include not only the extrajudicial statements of crime victims and percipient witnesses, but law enforcement officers and expert witnesses alike.  (Whitman, supra, 54 Cal.3d at p. 1073;  Hosek v. Superior Court (1992) 10 Cal.App.4th 605, 608–609 (Hosek).)

The statute is not without limits, however.   In Whitman, our Supreme Court made clear that Proposition 115 “does not authorize a finding of probable cause based on the testimony of a noninvestigating officer or ‘reader’ merely reciting the police report of an investigating officer․  The testifying officer ․ must not be a mere reader but must have sufficient knowledge of the crime or the circumstances under which the out-of-court statement was made so as to meaningfully assist the magistrate in assessing the reliability of the statement.”  (Whitman, supra, 54 Cal.3d at pp. 1072–1073.)

The testifying officer in Whitman lacked such knowledge.   He was not involved with the defendant's arrest for driving under the influence, nor was he personally aware of the circumstances under which the defendant's sobriety tests, including a blood test, were conducted.   And because he did not speak with the arresting officer about his report, he was completely ignorant of the circumstances under which the report was made.   However, at the preliminary hearing, his testimony about the contents of the report served as the main basis for the defendant's bindover.  (Whitman, supra, 54 Cal.3d at pp. 1068–1069.)

The Supreme Court found this extremely troubling.   The problem was, the testifying officer's connection to the case was so attenuated there was no way for the magistrate to ensure the information conveyed from the arrest report was reliable.   The court was particularly concerned the testifying officer “was unable to answer any potentially significant questions regarding the methods and circumstances of [the arresting officer's] investigation, including the time the report was written, the details of the sobriety tests given ․, and [the defendant's] pupil reaction and degree of dilation.   Indeed, [the testifying officer] was even uncertain how long [the arresting officer] had been employed on the force or even whether [the arresting officer] was a male or a female.”  (Whitman, supra, 54 Cal.3d at pp. 1074–1075.)


----------



## mark handler

More and full story at  http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1636690.html


----------



## mark handler

Prosecutor: Man poisoned wife for life insurance

http://abc7.com/news/prosecutor-man-poisoned-wife-for-life-insurance/324666/

Thursday, September 25, 2014

SANTA ANA, Calif. (KABC) --

 Closing statements were made Thursday in a trial for a man accused of poisoning his wife to collect her life insurance.

Paul Curry, 57, faces charges of murder with special circumstances and insurance in the death of his wife Linda Curry in 1994.

"He did something to cause her death. He injected her with nicotine, caused her death. He intended for her to die. That's it," prosecutor Ebrahim Baytieh said in his closing arguments.

Baytieh added that Curry showed little concern for his wife while she grew sicker. When she died, he received about $500,000 after being married for 21 months, he said.

Curry's first wife also mysteriously grew sick, but when she failed to qualify for life insurance, Curry left her, Baytieh said.

"She got sick. They don't know why. He wants her to get life insurance. She gets rejected. He leaves her and now she's fine," Baytieh said. "She got lucky because she got rejected!"

Curry's attorney Lisa Kopelman painted another picture. She said the case was based on circumstantial evidence.

"Paul Curry is not a murderer. This case is all about conjecture, innuendo and suspicion," Kopelman said.

Curry is a former nuclear physicist and trained chemist who worked at the San Onofre nuclear power plant.

After his wife's death in San Clemente in 1994, he moved to Kansas where he worked as a city building inspector.

Kopelman said her client is only guilty of illegally collecting Linda Curry's life insurance benefits, not murder.

"He had committed this small act of insurance fraud," Kopelman said. "He's now pegged the criminal who committed this murder. He did not commit the crime of murder."


----------



## mark handler

Jury to begin deliberations in woman's 1994 death

BY KELLY PUENTE   / STAFF WRITER

Published: Sept. 25, 2014 Updated: 7:02 p.m.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/curry-636354-wife-linda.html?page=2

Prosecutors say he’s a cold-hearted murderer who poisoned his wife andcollected the insurance money.

The defense says he is a loving husband who nursed his chronically-ill spouse and was devastated when she died.

Now, the fate of Paul Curry will be decided by an Orange County Superior Court jury, which will begin deliberating in Santa Ana on Monday.

Curry, a former San Onofre engineer and chemist, is accused of poisoning his 50-year-old wife, Linda Curry of San Clemente, with a lethal injection of nicotine in 1994.

He was a suspect from the beginning, but prosecutors didn’t believe they had enough evidence to file charges until the case was re-launched in 2007 and new evidence uncovered a different time frame for the alleged nicotine injection.

Sixteen years after his wife’s death, Curry was arrested in 2010 and charged with murder and insurance fraud. If convicted of all charges, Curry, now 57, will face an automatic sentence of life without parole.

In closing arguments Thursday, Assistant District Attorney Ebrahim Baytieh painted Paul Curry as a greedy and calculated killer who viewed his wife as nothing more than a paycheck.

“In this courtroom sits a vicious, cold-blooded murderer who killed a person he was supposed to love and protect,” Baytieh said. “It was all about money.”

Prosecutors have said Paul Curry pushed Linda Curry to take out life insurance policies and insisted they get married. After her death, he collected more than $547,000 in life insurance and other benefits.

The pair met in 1989 while both were working at the San Onofre nuclear plant. When they married in 1992, he was 35 and she was 48.

Late June 9, 1994, Paul Curry called 911 and said his wife was in bed in their San Clemente home and was not breathing. Paramedics took Linda Curry to a hospital, where she was pronounced dead.

Baytieh, earlier in the trial, said Paul Curry started applying for life insurance payouts the day after her funeral, not realizing his wife had made her sister the beneficiary.

But Curry filed appeals with insurance companies, Baytieh said, and got more than $400,000 in payouts, plus a monthly $564.07 check from Southern California Edison that he collected until 2011.

Deputy Public Defender Lisa Kopelman told the jury Linda Curry had serious health issues for years before she married.

Kopelman said Linda Curry was desperate to find a cure for her chronic health issues and was known to dabble in alternative medicine. She might have taken nicotine as a medicine since some studies have shown nicotine enemas can treat gastrointestinal problems, she said.

More than 20 years after Linda Curry’s death, there’s little direct evidence that points to her husband as a killer, she said.

“We have to consider all the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt,” Kopelman said.

Even before her death, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department had questioned the Currys. During a 1993 hospitalization, an unexplained dose of lidocaine was found in an IV bag, suggesting someone had tampered with it, according to court filings.

Baytieh said Linda Curry had suspicions about her husband.

“Well the only person I can think of to have a motive to do it would be Paul and the only motive I can think of is money,” she had told police.

Paul Curry has said he would have nothing to gain from his wife’s death, which he called “financially devastating.”

Staff writers Eric Hartley and Scott Schwebke contributed to this article.

Contact the writer: kpuente@ocregister.com


----------



## fatboy

It will be interesting to hear the verict.....


----------



## ICE

So far, I haven't heard how the nicotine was administered----or any connection of nicotine to Mr. Curry.  For 16 years the DA wasn't willing to charge him with a crime due to a lack of evidence.  Now there is some new technology which provides a time line of the introduction of the nicotine that is evidence that, one, a murder took place and two, that he did it.  Sounds fishy to me but the media can't be trusted....who knows?


----------



## cda

Paul curry


----------



## kilitact

The question that I have is what happen to his car?


----------



## mark handler

kilitact said:
			
		

> The question that I have is what happen to his car?


And that relates how?


----------



## conarb

mark handler said:
			
		

> And that relates how?


He had a 1951 Studebaker that he tooled around Las Vegas in, I had one too when in college, it was that wild Raymond Lowey design with the bullet nose.


----------



## beach

Is this him?http://abc7.com/news/man-accused-of-poisoning-wife-for-life-insurance-found-guilty-of-murder/331348/''>http://abc7.com/news/man-accused-of-poisoning-wife-for-life-insurance-found-guilty-of-murder/331348/' rel="external nofollow">

http://abc7.com/news/man-accused-of-poisoning-wife-for-life-insurance-found-guilty-of-murder/331348/


----------



## fatboy

Yup, one and the same!


----------



## mtlogcabin

Conarb

Is this the car?







I wonder what wife # 3 is thinking about now?


----------



## cda

Curry will be sentenced Oct. 31, and could spend the rest of his life in state prison.


----------



## Min&Max

Life in prison is to easy---unless I get to design the prison, meal program and "activities".


----------



## mtlogcabin

3 things in life you can not choose

1 Relatives

2 Neighbors

3 Cell Mates


----------



## fatboy

At least the first two, you can distance yourself from................


----------



## kilitact

Solitary confinement will distance one from the third.


----------



## mark handler

And would they place him in Solitary confinement?

The CA jails are over crowded


----------



## kilitact

If they didn't place him in the hole, wouldn't that be a violation of his civil rights if he was opposed to and couldn't function within the general population?. Perhaps he could sue for his freedom.


----------



## Daddy-0-

Has it been 3 years already.


----------



## cda

Date	Time	Hearing Type - Reason	Courtroom

11/14/2014	09:00 AM	Sentencing -	C40


----------



## mark handler

Paul Curry gets life in prison for wife's poisoning death in San Clemente

The former San Onofre power plant employee slowly poisoned his wife over the course of a year before injecting her with a fatal dose of nicotine in 1994.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/curry-642152-paul-linda.html

Friends and family members never doubted who killed their beloved Linda Curry, but it would take more than two decades for that person to face justice.

A former San Onofre power plant employee was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole Friday for killing his wife in 1994 so he could collect on the insurance money.

Paul Curry slowly poisoned Linda Curry, 50, over the course of a year before he finally slipped her a powerful sedative and injected her with a fatal dose of nicotine in their San Clemente home on June 9, 1994.

In the courtroom of Orange County Superior Court Judge Patrick Donahue, Paul Curry, now 57, showed no emotion as the judge handed down the life sentence. His shackles rattled as he was led out of the courtroom.

In her witness impact statement, Linda Curry’s niece, Rickianne Rycraft, said the family never liked Paul Curry and always knew he was the killer. Rycraft described the pain of watching her aunt grow weak from poisoning.

“We know that Linda was slowly poisoned,” she said. “He tortured her.”

A jury in September convicted Paul Curry of first-degree murder with the special circumstance allegations of murder for financial gain and murder by poisoning. The judge last month rejected a motion that Paul Curry was denied his right to due process because of the delayed prosecution.

Police had suspected him from the beginning, but prosecutors didn’t believe they had enough evidence to file charges. The case was relaunched in 2007 and investigators discovered new evidence that revealed a shorter time frame for the nicotine injection.

Sixteen years after his wife’s death, Paul Curry was arrested in 2010 and charged with murder and insurance fraud. At the time of his arrest he was living with his family in Salina, Kan., where he worked as chief county building inspector.

In the trial, Deputy District Attorney Ebrahim Baytieh painted Paul Curry as a cold-blooded killer who viewed his wife as nothing more than a paycheck.

The day after his wife’s funeral, he started applying for life insurance payouts and eventually collected more than $547,000 in insurance and other benefits. He later bought himself a new Cadillac.

Deputy Public Defender Lisa Kopelman argued that Linda Curry had struggled with chronic health issues for years before she married, and little direct evidence points to her husband as a killer.

To explain the high level of nicotine in her system, Kopelman argued that Linda Curry may have used a nicotine enema as a holistic treatment for her many ailments.

Paul and Linda Curry met in 1989 while both were working at the San Onofre nuclear plant. When they married in 1992, he was 35 and she was 48. They were married for 21 months.

Even before her death, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department was questioning the Currys. During a 1993 hospitalization, an unexplained dose of lidocaine was found in an IV bag, suggesting someone had tampered with it.

Linda Curry told detectives that her husband was a likely suspect, according to court documents.

“Well the only person I can think of to have a motive to do it would be Paul, and the only motive I can think of is money,” she said.

Contact the writer: kpuente@ocregister.com


----------



## mark handler

MAN SENTENCED TO LIFE IN PRISON FOR POISONING WIFE IN 1994

http://abc7.com/news/man-sentenced-to-life-in-prison-for-poisoning-wife-in-1994/395659/

By ABC7.com staff

Friday, November 14, 2014 01:49PM

Paul Curry, a former nuclear engineer, has been sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for poisoning his wife with a lethal injection of nicotine in 1994.

Linda Curry, 50, died just nine months into their marriage. After his wife's death in San Clemente in 1994, Paul Curry moved to Kansas, where he worked as a city building inspector. Curry was arrested in 2010, 16 years after his wife's death. He was charged with murder and insurance fraud.

Prosecutors claimed the motive was $547,695 from his wife's life insurance policies and other benefits, saying Paul Curry had an "insatiable appetite for money."

During the trial, defense attorney Lisa Kopelman told jurors that Curry was a loving husband who nursed his chronically ill wife. But the jury did not agree.

"I think we had a very smart jury that went through all the evidence and kept thinking that for 16 years he was enjoying the fact that, in his mind, he thought he got away with murder," prosecutor Ebrahim Baytieh said


----------



## jar546

Well, I guess that's that.


----------



## mark handler

Appeals. .


----------



## conarb

In all instances that I have been involved in the press has always gotten it all wrong, something isn't right here:



> Linda Curry, 50, died just nine months into their marriage. After his wife's death in San Clemente in 1994, Paul Curry moved to Kansas, where he worked as a city building inspector.


When we knew him it was in the early 2000s as I recall, he was in Las Vegas then, so one wonders what else they have wrong?


----------



## ICE

conarb said:
			
		

> In all instances that I have been involved in the press has always gotten it all wrong, something isn't right here


I have experienced the same.  What I haven't seen with this case is any evidence that he did it.  There's no denying that it looks kike he did it, but there needs to be evidence.  What am I missing?

I saw him on TV.  He doesn't look so good.


----------



## cda

If you want to write in the future

Once he gets in the system

http://inmatelocator.cdcr.ca.gov


----------



## fatboy

I wondered the same........where is his time in Vegas?

Regardless, it's too bad, wasted life(s), I met him in Denver when we had the sham meeting with the ICC regarding their forum and the plans to rebuild it, he was a very personable guy.

I wonder if he pokes around here at all..........I don't know enough about the database to go look............


----------



## conarb

Lots doesn't make sense, in 1994 he has a presumably high-paying job as a nuclear engineer, his wife also has such a job.  He kills his wife for $550,000 and eventually takes a job as a building inspector in Las Vegas, later he takes another building inspector job in a small town in Kansas.  I read somewhere that his degrees were in chemistry, that's a far cry from nuclear engineer, but would give him knowledge of nicotine toxicity.  Seems like the key would be with his associates in the nuclear industry, but presumably the cops have interviewed all of them.


----------



## cda

ICE said:
			
		

> I have experienced the same.  What I haven't seen with this case is any evidence that he did it.  There's no denying that it looks kike he did it, but there needs to be evidence.  What am I missing?I saw him on TV.  He doesn't look so good.


"Circumstantial case" they happen all the time


----------



## cda

fatboy said:
			
		

> I wondered the same........where is his time in Vegas?Regardless, it's too bad, wasted life(s), I met him in Denver when we had the sham meeting with the ICC regarding their forum and the plans to rebuild it, he was a very personable guy.
> 
> I wonder if he pokes around here at all..........I don't know enough about the database to go look............


Some systems allow some Internet access some none at all

My guess he has had none


----------



## conarb

cda said:
			
		

> Some systems allow some Internet access some none at allMy guess he has had none


I wonder that they base that on, any idea?  The guy in prison that I'd like to hear from is Ted Kaczynski,     167 IQ, a member of the "Green" movement, and some are starting to say *he was very prescient as we lose our freedoms.*


----------



## cda

conarb said:
			
		

> I wonder that they base that on, any idea?  The guy in prison that I'd like to hear from is Ted Kaczynski,     167 IQ, a member of the "Green" movement, and some are starting to say *he was very prescient as we lose our freedoms.*


depends on the system. cost money to provide the service

biggest thing I see is it caused a lot more problems if provided

Just send Ted a letter, sure he would be glad to hear from someone


----------



## mark handler

ICE said:
			
		

> I saw him on TV.  He doesn't look so good.


He now has a full beard....


----------



## mark handler

At booking


----------



## cda

he has a new number

AV2511

CURRY, PAUL MARSHAL AV2511 58 11/26/2014          Wasco, about mid california

http://inmatelocator.cdcr.ca.gov


----------



## FM William Burns

Because I know most of us old timers who met, consulted, and talked with Paul have followed this tragic story for years now......I saw tonight that NBC Dateline is airing the story Friday night at 8 pm EST and 7 pm Central:

http://www.nbcnews.com/dateline


----------



## Mech

> Because I know most of us old timers who met, consulted, and talked with  Paul have followed this tragic story for years now......I saw tonight  that NBC Dateline is airing the story tomorrow night at 8 pm EST and 7  pm Central:


FM William Burns: I think you're off a day (or my computer is lying to me.)  The show is airing on Friday.


----------



## FM William Burns

Yep, you are indeed correct Mech.  I'll edit.......long day.....thanks!


----------



## pyrguy

Anybody else see the story?


----------



## mark handler

pyrguy said:
			
		

> Anybody else see the story?


Yes........


----------



## ICE

I just watched it.  There were enough details which I didn't know previously that convinced me that he did it.....but there's still one question.  The claim is that the level of nicotine in her blood was such that death would have come within minutes of reaching that level.  So Paul was the only person with her that evening....Ergo, Paul killed her.  The prosecution says that a needle mark was found behind her ear.  It seems impossible to have a high concentration in her blood if the nicotine was administered subcutaneously behind her ear.

I found it remarkable that he was able to get a job at, and a license to operate, a nuclear reactor by lying on his application.  I've heard of fake lawyers and fake doctors but it's a real stretch to become a fake nuclear physicist.  I wonder how he buffaloed his way into the Building Official position at Salina Kansas?

He should have tried for King....it's good to be the King.


----------



## pyrguy

He worked in the building department in Vegas before Salina.  The nuclear physicist was a great lie. How did he get away with that has me wondering.

Sub-q in the right place doesn't take long to travel through the body. Insulin is injected sub-q. Some of the newer stuff works in about 10 -15 minutes.


----------



## mark handler

pyrguy said:
			
		

> The nuclear physicist was a great lie. How did he get away with that has me wondering.


Noone checked....


----------



## conarb

Was it at the very beginning at 6:00 PST?  I forgot and turned the TV on about 6:20 and had a hell fo a time trying to find it, Comcast has changed our cable lineup since I last used the TV, the old NBC is now infomercials and I did find a new NBC Bay Area, by then it was 6:30.


----------



## pyrguy

It was the whole hour.


----------



## conarb

pyrguy said:
			
		

> It was the whole hour.


Thanks, I guess I better look up Comcast's schedule and see what they are doing.

If he faked being a nuclear physicist did he have any engineering degree?


----------



## pyrguy

According to them he did not have a degree.


----------



## fatboy

He was a very smart, personable guy, I could see him talking his way through it.


----------



## conarb

pyrguy said:
			
		

> According to them he did not have a degree.





			
				\ said:
			
		

> The *San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station* (*SONGS*) is an inoperative nuclear power plant located on the Pacific coast of California, in the northwestern corner of San Diego County, south of San Clemente, and situated in Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV. The plant is currently in the initial stages of preparation to be decommissioned after being closed in 2013 following the failure of recently replaced steam generators.
> 
> When fully functional, the plant had employed over 2,200 people. The station, between the ocean and Interstate 5, is a prominent landmark because of its twin spherical containment buildings, designed to contain any unexpected releases of radiation.
> 
> In May 2013 Senator Barbara Boxer, chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said the modifications had proved to be "unsafe and posed a danger to the eight million people living within 50 miles of the plant,” and she called for a criminal investigation. ¹


If they had non-degreed engineers like Paul, maybe that's why they are being decommissioned.

¹ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Onofre_Nuclear_Generating_Station


----------



## cda

I was built in 1964!!!

Before today's earthquake standards and Calif. crazies.


----------



## cda

getting old, did Paul post on this current forum??

And same question for Las Vegas and Salina where did he get the building credentials to even  apply???

What was his job title in Vegas??


----------



## conarb

\ said:
			
		

> And same question for Las Vegas and Salina where did he get the building credentials to even apply???


I wondered the same thing, then I realized that someone here said years ago that ICC examinations are open book, a guy smart enough to get a job as a nuclear engineer could certainly easily pass any number of open book exams.


----------



## ICE

cda said:
			
		

> getting old, did Paul post on this current forum??


492 times.   Started 22 threads.  Thanked once.  Zero thanks.


----------



## pyrguy

He was a plans examiner in North Las Vegas before Kansas


----------



## cda

Pauls story was on 48 hours again Saturday 8/6


----------



## fatboy

For inquiring minds..............

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/to-catc...1994-nicotine-poisoning-death-of-linda-curry/


----------



## conarb

I found this interesting:



			
				48  Hours said:
			
		

> "The chief of police said, 'Oh, he's a building inspector. He's very smart. He's never gonna talk to you,'" said Shull.



They think building inspectors are very smart.  Think of us poor contractors, our livelihood depends on outsmarting building inspectors.  He's appealing, if he wins the appeal and gets another building inspector job I wonder if he'll come back here?  He talked about tooling around Vegas in his blue '51 Studebaker, I bonded with him since I had a blue '51 Studebaker when I was in college.


----------

