The friction between the prosecution and defense in the Carly Gregg case heated up Friday. Rankin-Madison Assistant District Attorney Kathryn Newman accused Gregg's lawyers, Kevin Camp and Bridget Todd, of playing games in the media as well as the courtroom in several motions filed Friday afternoon.
Carly Gregg stands accused of murdering her mother and trying to kill her stepfather in March at their home in Rankin County. Gregg was 14 years-old when the alleged crimes took place. She is scheduled to go to trial on September 16.
Assistant District Attorney Kathryn Newman submitted a motion to enforce the court's orders to compel discovery and to exclude evidence not produced in discovery. Discovery has been quite the bone of contention between the defense and prosecution since Gregg was indicted in May.
Newman filed two motions to compel discovery on August 19. Circuit Judge Dewey Arthur granted both motions and ordered defense counsel to provide all discovery to the prosecution by the close of business on August 20. The jurist repeatedly warned attorneys Kevin Camp and Bridget Todd against conducting "trial by ambush."
The motion claims "some discovery" was provided on August 20. However, "the defense told the State that they also intended to call several witnesses whose identity was not included in their disclosure." Newman states she has tried "multiple times" to get the names of the witnesses but the "defense has been unwilling to provide this information."
Newman asked Judge Arthur to exclude any evidence not submitted in discovery as she stated "the defense has consistently failed to abide by the Court's deadlines." Indeed, JJ reported how co-counsel Caleb Coleman blew off Judge David Morrow's order to provide all medical records. Earlier post.
Such was the first motion. The State filed two more similar motions Friday afternoon as it seeks to muzzle Gregg's attorneys from making public comments about the case.
The motion argues the Mississippi Rules of Criminal Procedure (18.9) bar attorneys from commenting on a case prior to the conclusion of trial. The rules allow the lawyer to make statements of a general nature about the defense or information contained in a public record. (P.3 in the motion, doc #176 posted below) provides a list of what is allowed.)
.png)
The motion describes a plethora of public statements Gregg's attorneys made to the media:
"The state only did half a report. They did a competency as to whether or not Carly is competent to stand trial. I think that is a waste of government resources as the defense never said she wasn't competent to stand trial. (Aug. 19)
I think the key issue in this case is going to be the medication and the change of the medication as well as some other physical and mental health factors that contributed... (Aug. 19)
And Carly of her own free will and decision decided that she trusts the Rankin COunty jurors more than she trusts a 40-year plea offer by the state.
I don’t like to try my cases in the media, I am very competent in the courtroom. But I do think that once this case is tried and the defense can actually put on their entire case and everyone can hear the truth of this matter, I think all that can be said is that people are going to feel sorry for everybody involved, the family, Carly. And I do think that once this comes out at trial, we will get an acquittal. (July 23) “Carly is surprising holding up really well. She has bad days like anyone can expect and she misses her mom. She misses her mom and sometimes she gets scared and she gets worried and she wants to see her mom. But other than that she has been holding up okay. She is a kid. (Aug. 6) “He (stepfather) has also been very honest in his testimony that even at the time in which he was shot that Carly did not recognize him. That there was no recognition whatsoever. He knew something was wrong and that is one of the reasons that he has chosen to stand by Carly even though he is the victim. (Aug. 27)
The motion states it is nice the "defense attorneys were claiming to be transparent during their interviews" but they have "failed to turn over ONE SINGLE statement of substance of a witness's testimony as required" by the rules and the Court's August 27 order.
Remember Dr. Mark Webb? The defense claimed at multiple hearings it was going to have Dr. Mark Webb, a Ridgeland psychiatrist, evaluate Gregg. Indeed, JJ learned from law enforcement sources that Dr. Webb visited the defendant at the Rankin County jail four times since she was incarcerated. Two other visits were made by other defense "experts." However, the defense decided to go in another direction, an action that did not please the prosecution. The motion states:
The defense announced on August 27, 2024, that it would not be using Dr. Mark Webb despite claiming for months he was their expert witness who was working on getting a report. On August 28, 2024, the defendant filed notice of a witness, Dr. Andrew Clark, but has not provided any proposed testimony.
The defense submitted the information with a notice to claim a defense of insanity. Dr. Clark is a psychiatrist in Massachusetts.
The prosecution was not done lacerating the defense as it accused Camp and Todd of trying to exclude the media because it would prejudice a jury against Gregg while making "statements to the media" that are "not truthful or ethical." "They are feeding false information to the public and it appears the defense is attempting to prejudice the jury," argued the motion.
The District Attorney asked the Court to hold Camp and Todd in contempt of court if they continue to "deliberately violate" the rules.
The motion concludes by requesting Judge Arthur issue a gag order to all attorneys, parties, and witnesses.
Synopsis of Case
Rankin County deputies arrested Carly Gregg on March 19 and charged her with murder and attempted murder. RSCO Investigator Zachary Cotton testified at her preliminary hearing that RCSO dispatch received a call on March 19 from a man who was frantic. The caller said "their child had shot at them, and shot them in the neck." Deputies went to the scene and found the deceased Ashley Smiley in a bedroom and found a wounded Heath Smiley. Heath identified Gregg as the shooter. Gregg had fled the scene.
Deputies found her half a mile away. They recovered the murder weapon.
Gregg is a very intelligent child. She earned a 30 on the ACT when she was 13 years old and skipped fourth grade.
Cotton said there was some video footage of the deadly events that took place that afternoon. An exterior camera in the garage showed Gregg and her mother arriving home at approximately 4 that afternoon. The camera and the interior camera in the kitchen showed Gregg taking the dogs outside while Ashley went to her daughter's bedroom. There were no other cameras in the house. Ashley "took some items out of Carly's room" as Carly came back inside and noticed her mother was in her bedroom.
The investigator said Gregg went to her mother's bedroom, came out with her hands behind her back as she concealed an object, and went to her bedroom where her mother was. "You hear a gunshot, a scream, and then two more gunshots," said Cotton. Ashley was shot twice in the side of the face and once underneath her chin. Deputies recovered all three bullets.
Camera footage showed Gregg returning to the kitchen. She "placed a heavy object on the counter" and texted Heath on Ashley's phone, asking how long it would be until he got home. She took down the camera and placed it in the refrigerator.
The friend and her father went to RCSO that evening and cooperated with the investigation.
Cotton testified that when jail employee provided bond paperwork to Gregg, the teen said "oh, you can kill someone, pay a lot of money, and get out of jail."
Gregg attorney Bridgett Todd claimed Gregg's medication was switched to Lexapro five days before the homicide.
Rankin County Court Judge David Morrow bound her over to the grand jury and kept her bond at $1 million at the preliminary hearing.
The Rankin County grand jury indicted Gregg for first-degree murder, attempted murder, and tampering with evidence in May. Circuit Judge Dewey Arthur denied bond for Gregg.
46 comments:
KF, great reporting. CJ you should take note on what "investigative reporting" is all about.
So they had to go all the way to Massachusetts to find a psychiatrist to say she’s crazy?
sounds like Carli learned the triple tap technique!
to 9:16.........yes they did go to Massachusetts to find dr, clarke. but the big difference here is that dr clark is not going to necessarily say she is is insane, he gonna say that her prior , local, home grown, pre- murder psychartrist perpetrated medical malpractice when he changed and upped her meds which made her homocidal.
this case is going to have the overtones of a civil medical malpractice case. and believe you me, when the defense chooses to slander a local doctor and blame it all on him, yes, you gotta go waaaaaaay out of town to find a doctor that will do that.
I've read the CV and the work of dr andrew ''harvard yard'' clarke . it seems he is a big believer in using the absolute bare minimums of medications on child psychiatric patients . I'm open to thoughts on how its gonna play out when harvard comes to town and meets up with rankin county.
9:48. If that’s going to be the defense position, then the defense is not going to have any evidence to rebut the presumption of sanity. I don’t see how it could expect to get a jury instruction on that defense without there being at least some evidence going to the actual insanity defense. If that is the strategy, then it seems that the “defense” is really going to be an attempt to get the jury to ignore evidence of guilt and acquit or convict of lesser included offenses out of sympathy or some other emotional reason. In other words, jury nullification.
At this point the defense should be looking for a plea deal, but the defendant is too smart to take one.
The next best hope is making a record for appeal.
Any thoughs as to how Camp's bill is being footed on behalf of Carly?
it seems he is a big believer in using the absolute bare minimums of medications on child psychiatric patients .
Hurrah.
Who is paying for this? Certainly a teenager facing life in prison can’t afford these attorneys and multiple expert witnesses
How do you get attorneys involved in the case from publishing a comment on your website if there is a gag order in place? 10:05 sounds like the defense's position and is floating this idea.
Kevin Camp gonna be Camp. I'll bet that codependent stepfather and other relatives are paying Camp.
Kingfish, I am SO glad that you're staying on top of this story! THANK YOU!
It seems like someone is trying to make a name for himself.
Here's an idea: Carlos Moore and Kevin Camp Law. (you know Carlos's name has to come first).
Carly misses her mother? The mother she shot and killed? Bullshit. Carly just wants to end up in Whitfield instead of prison.
Hiring Camp in a murder case makes record for appeal.
The irony of the Rankin District Attorney office complaining about late discovery is almost too much to bear.
But isn't Kevin Camp a DUI attorney? Does he also do criminal defense?
Good job, Kingfish.
I agree 100% - compel discovery and exclude evidence not produced in discovery.
to 10:54....i told you before , the money farieys pay for the lawyers.
to 12:58.....DUI cases are criminal defense.
considering the way this defense has been handled to this point , the defense may well be gagged and sanctioned before this trial even starts. judge dewey auther is no one to trifle with.
I think the defense is in over their heads.
Claiming the defense is in over its head is like claiming the defendant is crazy but performed meticulous plans before and after the murder.
The defense is playing Dewey Arthur and the Prosecution like a Stradivarius.
A quick show of hands for who thinks 4:40 is Camp singing his own praise.
TO 4:40....................playing the DA and the judge?????????
thats one bold claim............................
you dont know much about pretrial procedure or insanity defenses , do you?
Stradivarius.............didnt he used to play for the saints?
Could the judge say "enough of your shenanigans" to the defense and issue a bench decision?
It’s standard procedure that the Rankin DA’s office never, ever turns over discovery timely. But, no judge has the guts to take care of business. This is hilarious.
Attorneys for either side or both sides engaging in legal maneuvering have nothing to do with the factual guilt or innocence of the Defendant. But they generally wind up having a lot to do with the finder-of-fact's determination of it. I do not know but if I were to speculate, I'd speculate that neither the offense or the defense particularly care about anything other than winning. I wonder what would happen if all counsel said, "Let's just find the truth, and then, let's see if we can find the best way to address that truth for all parties..."
I do not wonder what would happen if the Easter bunny rode up on a unicorn to help Santa and Rudolph deliver toys. I also do not wonder whether a 14 year old killing her mother and wounding another is a tragedy no matter other facts. I do not wonder about such things because I am sure of the answer to those things.
I don't need to know jack about pretrial procedure or insanity defense to know these junior lawyers are playing both the judge and the prosecution by stalling, pretending to be ignorant and acting like deer in the headlights. It's known as a 'What, who me?' strategy.
The MA psychiatrist likely came to the conclusion that the girl was lucid, cooperative, and coherent....and fully knew what she was doing. So the defense had to find some other doc that will say she's "ill" when she's not.
This should be interesting. The change in medication is notable and if it rises to level med mal, I'm not sure why the defense hasn't filed a pre-emptive complaint with the board. It sounds like the girl should have been referred for inpatient psychiatric treatment. It's a shame that it got to this level, there are tons of stories of families not willing to temporarily let go and losing their lives as a result.
9:43 has an interesting comment which for the most part I agree with. It isn’t about what is right or wrong, but for the attorney is about winning.
9:38, Winning by any means necessary is what gets attorneys sanctioned, disbarred, etc. It also frequently prejudices the client's case, i.e., backfires.
"9:38, Winning by any means necessary is what gets attorneys sanctioned, disbarred, etc."
Pure bullshit. I cannot recall the last time a MS lawyer was disciplined, much less disbarred, for things related to attempting to win a case as counsel. Most of what little disciplinary action the MS Bar takes is for financial shenanigans with trust accounts, blatantly neglecting a client, and criminal conduct not related to work for clients.
An ACT test has nothing to do with how socially and psychologically well adjusted someone is. It speaks only to competency.
This comment stream reads like a gossip column and I hope some of you are never jurors.
We do not know what went on in this home or what the medical history is what the drug reactions are and whether or not the prescription dosage was correctly prescribed and taken.
Lexapro has serious side effects including mood swings and suicidal behaviors. Those side effects can be far worse than they sound. " Mood swings" is a pharmaceutical euphemism. It does relate however to impaired brain function.
I wish all lawyers were banned from speaking publicly about a criminal case. Long ago they refrained out of a sense of honor and ethics.
In the '60's it became a successful defense attorney tactic and now it seems the prosecutors and law enforcement all have to be their own publicists. And few professional organizations actually enforce their ethical codes anymore.
We no longer understand that one's ability to control personal speech and behavior is our best indicator of a person's reliability, maturity and character. And, sadder still is that humans both smart and dumb can become mentally ill or brain damaged.
Clearly this young woman was prescribed a very strong mind altering drug. So perhaps a jury will learn from a truly qualified person what " mood swings" includes in an extreme allergic reaction.
Our mental health system was more functional in the last century than in this one and more help than handing out pills was available. What kind of help do y'all really expect to be able to find and find quickly when a member of your family becomes mentally impaired and especially if you have modest means or the impaired person controls family finances? I hope those of you contributing nonsense won't ever have to learn the hard way.
'
i don't think the girl is crazy, i think the mother drove her crazy and gave her meds she didn't need to control her for whatever reason. if there's no abuse or any surprises, looks really bad.
to 12:04....to mr. ''i don't know jack''....you can say that again...........wow, tell us about your legal credentials and exactly what ''strategy'' you would use?
we are waiting.....
the money faries pay it!!!!!!!!
Can The father could be charged for giving access to a child under the age that was used for murder & attempted murder, like Colin Gray was charged yesterday.
September 4 at 10:58: You do realize that judges sanction lawyers, not just the MS Bar, don't you?
Have you seen the list of sanctions by the courts against Carlos Moore? That list has been published on this blog?
Have you seen the list of Trump lawyers that have been disbarred in jurisdictions across the county?
good.
imagine this scenario:
your 14yo is acting up and her behavioral problems are so bad you drag her to a shrink and put her on heavy shrink meds.
BUT
you leave an instantly-accessible gun in the bedroom insecured.
GREAT PARENTING!
apparently loaded
Interesting thoughts in the video here:
https://www.courttv.com/news/no-exceptions-discovery-violations-leave-carly-greggs-defense-in-limbo/
Re that CourtTV video, IF the defense attorneys are DELIBERATELY trying to "torpedo" their case so that the case will end up being appealed, is that basically an admission on the part of the defense that they don't really know of any way to help this young woman?
After all, it's CLEAR that she commmitted the crimes, AND she WAS NOT LEGALLY INSANE when she committed the crimes.
IF the defense attorneys are INTENTIONALLY trying to "torpedo" their case, will they REFUND to the family all the money they have been paid to defend this young woman?
IF this young woman actually believed that what she was doing was not morally wrong, then that is because that is what SHE CHOSE to believe.
That is EVIL.
Post a Comment