The fix is in: Judge John Brown will let killer Jason Ravnsborg access the medical records of Joe Boever, the man he killed, even though Ravnsborg is on trial not for killing Boever but for three misdemeanor traffic charges that have nothing to do with Boever’s health or state of mind.
Hyde County deputy state’s attorney Emily Sovell, the Ravnsborg law school classmate who has the unenviable task of trying to make it look like the state is holding Ravnsborg accountable for breaking the law, did argue that Joe Boever’s health records are irrelevant to the case at hand:
“It’s not a homicide case. It’s not a manslaughter case,” Sovell argued. “I really think we are stretching too far in this case.”
She added that the defense has everything the prosecution has. “His (Boever’s) state of mind is not part of our case,” she said. “Mister Boever is not on trial. His psychological history is not on trial.”
Ravnsborg wasn’t in the courtroom Monday and hasn’t yet attended a proceeding in the matter. He is charged with using an electronic device while driving, an illegal lane change and careless driving. They are class-two misdemeanors, each punishable by up to 30 days in county jail and a $500 fine [Karen Sherman and Bob Mercer, “Judge Grants Ravnsborg Defense Motion on Victim’s Medical and Psychological Records; Trial to Start at End of August,” KELO-TV, 2021.07.12].
On the good side, Judge Brown is not allowing this foray into irrelevant character assassination to delay the trial. He still plans to hold the trial on August 26 and 27 in the Stanley County courthouse in Fort Pierre. Ravnsborg has blocked cameras from the courtroom, but the press and public can still attend this very important trial of South Dakota’s top law enforcement official.
Just a typical Republican, what did you expect?
So basically if we are in an “at fault “ fender bender we can introduce the other driver’s not at fault medical records and mental history as long as as charge is misdemeanor
I am in no way saying this is “light” and the killing was a fender bender, they are.
Once all this non-relevent testimony is entered into the criminal case, is this to help his civil trial in some way? It sounds like a lot of lawyer work to get the Boever estate to fix his Taurus.
If the Nemec brothers had just shut up months ago, this wouldnt be happening. instead they continue to bring emotional pain to the Boever family by running to the media every chance they get. Some people just love the limelight a a bit too much Joe Boever deserves to RIP but because of his own relatives, he wont get that chance. Hello, no wonder your idiot AG is pouncing on this.
I have not seen the Judge’s order and did not attend the hearing so this observation is based on the newspaper report that Cory linked to the top of this story. According to that newspaper,
Normally an “in-camera review” is when a Judge, not the attorneys, reviews the proposed third party medical records to determine whether there appears to be any relevant or exculpatory information in the records. The modifier “in-camera” means, in effect, in the judge’s private chambers out of the eyes of the public and the attorneys, although there are situations where the attorneys have seen the evidence in advance to be reviewed “in camera” by the judge. Medical records, however, are normally restricted and inaccessible to the attorney absent an order for release to the requesting attorney.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_camera#:~:text=In%20United%20States%20courts%20in,a%20party%20or%20made%20public.
Thus, the suggestion that “Judge John Brown will let killer Jason Ravnsborg access the medical records of Joe Boever” seems incorrect, at least according to the linked newspaper article. Indeed, the article reports that Judge Brown asked Ravnsborg’s attorney about his proposed witnesses “if the judge’s private review finds any potentially relevant material in the medical and psychological records.”
Generally, it is often grounds for appeal or for a later habeas petition if a trial Judge refuses a defense attorney’s request to even look at, i.e. conduct an “in camera review” of, private records to determine whether it might contain exculpatory evidence. It is a stretch to conclude the fix is in or that the judge is playing favorites to Ravnsborg based on this minimal amount of information. On the face of the information linked by Cory, the judge’s order appear to be a perfectly normal order in a criminal case, and I saw no indication that the Judge is biased or has decided to release any of the records to Ravnsborg.
BCB, I hope you are right, and I hope Judge Brown looks at the records and says the defense has no business snooping in them. But I refer back to the original motion and see that Rensch asked for “an in camera review by Court and/or counsel.”
I do appreciate the point that the judge may have to grant greater leeway to the defense in order to avoid an appeal later… but would we really expect to see an appeal of traffic misdemeanors?
Borgg is disgusting.
Where are Democrats, they should be asking to impeach, now!
So it was fine for the public to see all the incriminating evidence against Ravnsborg, that was called transparency, but when Ravnsborg wants to salvage his future by showing Boever took extremely high doses of medication, wasn’t thinking clearly and may have been suicidal, then you say the fix is in. Hypocrisy looms large.
It’s not fine, Hap, because the information Ravnsborg is trying to introduce into this case is not relevant to defending him from these three charges. Ravnsborg is on trial, not the man he killed.
Another example of “Blame the victim.”
Lawyers doing their job.
This theory of the defense may work in the criminal case, but it has absolutely destroyed what little was left of Jason’s political future. He will never be forgiven in the court of public opinion.
ABC-you keep hammering on “where are the Dems”? and their impeachment of this imbecilic AG!!!! You do realize, don’t you, that the chance that the so few Dems in SD government wouldn’t have a chance to convict a GOP in this state? Look what a 50/50 Congress let loose on the American public-a real scumbag of a president-twice, because of GOP stupidity.
Happy Camper is a NON-thinker!
Are you sure about that, Neal? Some Republicans seem quick to leap to Ravnsborg’s defense. Are you hearing statements to the contrary from Republicans? Is Jackley a shoe-in for the nomination next year?
BCB is correct. An in camera review just means the judge will review the requested documentation himself and determine if the records should be released to the requesting party.
Cory, no, normally you wouldn’t anticipate an appeal from a misdemeanor conviction for traffic offenses. This case has the unique aspect of the civil lawsuit that likely will follow. Evidence of an actual conviction for a relevant traffic offense is normally admissible in a civil case (while evidence of an acquittal is not admissible!) and can undermine any defense to a civil wrongful death lawsuit, and even support an award of punitive damages. Typically insurance doesn’t protect against a punitive damage award. And depending on the particular insurance policy carried by the defendant, even a judgment for actual damages can substantially exceed the policy limits. These potential outcomes make this particular case anything but normal.
Meanwhile, they found the hit-and-run driver who hit a moped in Sioux Falls, and there have been no arrests, no charges. Can’t wait to find out what position this driver holds. Or is hit and run now legal in this state?
https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/crime/2021/07/12/driver-suv-who-hit-moped-sioux-falls-located/7945094002
“Is Jackley a shoe-in for the nomination next year?”
Jason has a handful of vocal loyalists but Marty is going to annihilate him.
As usual you are missing the point. For a moment think of this as a case study in taking down a politician. Before his trial the governor releases damaging evidence that only shows one side, the side that she thinks will make him resign. Meanwhile the liberal press demands information in the name of transparency so they do Noem’s job for her. Jason has already been convicted of the crime by public opinion in relation to charges that were never brought, so he is denied his day in court in which through discovery for those higher charges this would have all come out and any rational person would see reasonable doubt. But no, again remember he has already been convicted because of the breakdown in the judicial process by Noem and progressive hacks like Cory and Tom Lawrence. So now, charged only with minor crimes you insist this information can’t come out so you can continue to vilify him with only selective evidence. This should be beneath so far beneath this blog, if ever there was an example of trying to destroy someone damn the consequences, irresponsible “journalism,” this is it. This is why I continue to say process matters. We have to have allegiance for due process, honor it, that is the best we can do as a society. Don’t ever defile it. If there is a sin, this is it.
As usual, Happy Camper?
If people “usually” miss your point, it’s not the people.
It’s the pointer.
No benefit in “pointing” out your faults.
Your self loathing needs no boost.
Oh come on happy, did you run over someone too? Did you get the sheriffs car to ride home in? Better clean out the front seat better. I’ve hit many things while I was driving and I knew what each one was. How low can you go blaming a dead man?
back in February The South Dakota Standard published a long detailed article by Nick Nemec about unanswered questions. He has walked the scene of the accident. He goes into details about the point of impact, the distance to where the body was found, questions the acceleration of a Ford Taurus. His own theory is that Boever’s body was under the Taurus, and that’s why nobody saw it.
What’s missing from the long article and all the details he provides is any mention of a flashlight or a pair of glasses. None of that “his face went through the windshield” fantasy. Nemec wants to make Ravnsborg look as bad as possible, but doesn’t mention a flashlight or glasses.
This suggests that these items do not exist outside of fevered imaginations, like Eve’s, who still thinks it was a hit and run.
Why is it so hard for people to stick to the known facts of the case?
And now this, having the judge review the medical records, is not about making them public, but members of the press want to say it is?
Anne, the investigators have said that his head went through the windshield and there was a flashlight that was still on found laying on the road by Joe Boever. Do you not believe them?
Come on Anne and other Ravnsborg supports, isn’t it sleazy for Ravnsborg to go after Joe’s medical information when he’s not being charged with manslaughter? Can y’all not comprehend that it is in poor taste and tacky?
You wouldn’t like it was your deceased loved one. So cut it out.
Whether Boever died by suicide or not is nobody’s business. So all you Christian Republics need to let this poor man RIP. Good grief! Shame on you!
Anne, at the time I wrote that article the fact that Joe Boever’s glasses were found inside Ravnsborg’s car and that he was carrying a flashlight hadn’t been released to the public. My not mentioning those two facts doesn’t mean that they are a fantasy, it simply means I (and the rest of the public) didn’t know about them at that time.
Anne, nothing make Ravnsborg look as bad as Ravnsborg does all by hisself. What IS it with you, anyway?
Anne national news has reported the horrible fact of the eyeglasses.
Jenny writes:
One of the charges Jason is facing is driving out of his lane. If he left his lane because Joe had thrown himself onto the hood of the car, Joe’s state of mind is obviously relevant to that charge. My life was financially and socially destroyed by “investigators” who jumped to conclusions and ruthlessly lied, both to me and about me, and I don’t believe anything solely because an agent of the government has said it.
Would you like your own public comments here if Jason were your falsely accused loved one?
It very well might not have been my business if the attorney general hadn’t been blamed for it.
How fast do brakes apply before they start visible tire marks on a highway? A split second?
I don’t know but this is something the investigators would have a good idea of.
Don’t all you Ravnsborg admirers think that if he did hit Boever on the highway there would be tire marks there also instead of only on the shoulder?
How did Ravnsborg know about the email Sovell got from Barnabas Nemec? Did Sovell have the ethical and legal right to divulge that information regarding Boever’s mental health? Was that email meant to be just for Sovell with a confidentiality agreement at the bottom?
So many questions we will probably never know.
Jenny asks:
It would generally take more than a split second to start visible tire marks, especially if the collision is unexpected and the vehicle is equipped with anti-lock brakes.
No. At over 60 miles per hour a driver might swerve from the driving lane to the ditch in less time than it would take to get his foot to the brake pedal.
Hunted all my life and have yet to see a deer with a human face wearing glasses. That said, I’m not a lawyer with a huge imagination.
“cibvet” writes:
Do you hunt at night, in the dark? Jason never said a deer shattered his windshield. He said he didn’t know what shattered his windshield.
https://www.google.com/search?q=did+ravmsborg+claim+he+hit+a+deer&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS925US925&oq=did+ravmsborg+claim+he+hit+a+deer&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i10i299.14812j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Pick yer poison, Kurt. AG claimed he hit a deer. He thought it was a deer. He thought it was a large animal, likely a deer. He thought it was a deer until he found Joe Boever’s body the next day. Those are his stories and he is sticking to them.
“mike from iowa” writes:
No he didn’t. He said he didn’t know what he’d hit.
Once again, we have to backtrack to re-establish basic facts:
Now as I discussed in my October 2020 analysis of the 911 transcript, Ravnsborg didn’t claim to have hit a deer at the scene; he said he had no idea what he hit, indicating he was either lying (those sure as heck weren’t antlers sticking through his windshield) or was totally not paying attention to the road. BUt two days after the crash, Ravnsborg issued his public statement claiming, “my vehicle struck something that I believed to be a large animal (likely a deer).”
Mike’s statement is correct. Kurt’s statement is incorrect.
“mike from iowa” had written:
I’d replied:
Cory writes:
Or maybe Jason was transitioning between speed zones and glanced down at the speedometer as the sprinting legs of a suicidal man flashed in front of the right headlight for a tiny fraction of a second, just before the windshield shattered.
Many other explanations are possible.
Jason said he didn’t know what he’d hit but believed it was likely a deer. He didn’t claim he hit a deer.