• Printer friendly
• E-mail to a friend
• 42 comment(s)
• Recommend

  ( 0 )

• 

Subject:

Body:

Poster:

Enter text seen above:

: 1/27/2010

This is obviously a case of PRESUMED GUILTY! A true failure of the justice system to provide a fair trial. The media has demonized Jesse James Hollywood from the start. Its no wonder there was jury misconduct. I hope he gets a new trial, as everyone is entitled to have the truth be told without hidden agendas from the prosecution. A mans life is at stake, and the jurors are making tasteless jokes during deliberation. Pretty scary.

Dog Lover

New trial for Mr. Hollywood : 1/27/2010

The jury found that Mr. Hollywood was NOT guilty of kidnapping for ransom and there was NO intent to kill. Therefore, a death or life without parole sentence is totally unwarranted. The punishment should fit the crime (simple kidnapping, maybe). This is a total travesty of justice.

tc1474

Nicholas Samuel Markowitz : 1/27/2010

I promise you that you will never be forgotten.
I love you ~
Mom
Susan Markowitz

Aching4Nick@aol.com

: 1/27/2010

A man that runs from justice & hides in South America has something to be guilty about. Who defends the murdered child's right to have his killer brought to justice? Let the evidence speak....this Hollywood "agenda" is all smoke and mirrors to waste the taxpayers money on another, unnecessary trial. Criminals seem to have more "rights" than their victims. Be there no mistake, Hollywood is a criminal and engaged in criminal activity be it selling illegal drugs or flight from justice, kidnapping or murder. Make no mistake "movies" are "movies" and the "facts are the "facts"

a parent

Hollywood : 1/27/2010

RE: Susan Markowitz comment: I know your grief is very painful, yet it is unfortunately mis-directed. The person that murdered Nick (Ryan Hoyt) has already confessed and been convicted. The fact that you are still seeking revenge on an innocent young man, and trying to destroy yet another life is evidence of your inability to find closure within yourself.
I know you are hurting, but to use the media via books, movies and television to justify your pain is not going help . I know it is not what Nick would have wanted. I, too, have lost a son. There comes a point in time that we must accept the truth and go on. Remembering Nick by starting a charitable organization or doing positive work in the community in his honor would be a much better way to carry on his momory and would give you peace and comfort. I hope it is not too late to save another life .

MattsMom

Jesse James : 1/27/2010

MattsMom:
How dare you presume to know what Nick's mom is feeling. Try to put yourself in her place. Wouldn't you want to make sure full justie was done? You comments are nothing but hurtful and you should be ashamed of youself.

SETmom

: 1/27/2010

The murdered child's killer WAS brought to justice and convicted. It was Ryan Hoyt. A scared, young 19 year-old boy who runs away out of fear after his parents and relatives were threatened by law enforcement does not make him guilty of anything. He had no criminal arrest records. Everyone is entitled to a "fair" trial, and this was not the case. Your theory that "because he ran, he must be guilty" is absurd.

a parent, too

MattsMom : 1/27/2010

I do hope you can step down from your high and mighty pedestal. Closure? Seriously? Her only child was brutally murdered and you think she's supposed to just accept this and move on? Have some respect and quit your condescending platitudes. She doesn't need the media to "justify her pain." Her pain is very clearly justified all by itself. Jesse James Hollywood ordered Ryan Hoyt to kill her son. Ryan was nothing but Jesse's sycophant and never would have gone against his orders. You may have reasons to believe otherwise and that's fine... neither one of us were there to see for sure... but to call Hollywood an "innocent young man" is a bit ridiculous, don't you think? Even by his own admissions, he was a drug dealer and a kidnapper who beat up a child, and fled the country when the boy's body was found. Even if you just leave it at that, that's not "innocent." That's four different crimes, not even counting ordering the murder.
And don't pretend to be in the same position as Susan. I'm sorry you lost a child. Did you lose a teenage child to a brutal murder for absolutely no reason?
But anyway...
Rest in peace, Nick. You won't be forgotten.

Another Mom

: 1/27/2010

To SETMom:
I do know how she feels. I lost a son,too. She is entitled to JUSTICE, not REVENGE!!! There is a difference. I still hurt every day but realize that nothing I can do, or any severe punishment for anyone else, is going to bring him back.

mattsmom

: 1/27/2010

Question:
Which is worse? A child murdered or a young man that did not receive a fair trial sentenced to death?
Answer:
Neither. Both are unthinkable and devastating,

Martin

Hollywood Case : 1/27/2010

If Hollywood had not ordered (and participated in) the kidnapping, then none of the subsequent events would have occurred, including any controversy about any movie and how it might have affected the jury. Running away to Brazil shows consciousness of guilt. Hollywood has the lion's share of the responsibility for what happened, regardless of what his defenders might claim.

LegendaryYeti

A District Attourney's Dream... : 1/27/2010

You think D.A. Lynn will be remembered for being a service to society...nope, just the D.A. in the "Hollywood" case.
Can't even find jurors who didn't see the movie. What a big stinking load of legal crap! Care to comment on that sir?

Boycott Boy

: 1/27/2010

And we wonder why our jails are over crowded! There is some truth to the fact that a good percentage of the people locked up are not guilty, politics at it's best.

1/27/10 : 1/27/2010

Hollywood's trial was fair and the truth was finally spoken and believed. He is very lucky not to have received the death penalty.

Sat in on all the trials

Equal Justice Under The Law : 1/27/2010

Obviously, Hollywood is not an "innocent young man", however he is less culpable in this case than Pressley or Rugge who both recieved lesser sentences in this case. Also, the jurors statement seems to indicate that Mr Hollywood did not recieve a fair trial in Santa Barbara because of the concentrated media saturation in SB before the case.
The fact that he ran is conciousness of guilt, but guilt of what? Possibly kidnapping, which was really all that was proved in this case. People flee prosecution for any number of reasons, drug charges, robbery, white collar crime etc. That is a separate issue and a seperate crime which Hollywood was NOT charged with. The fact that Mr Hollywood sold marajuana has absolutely no bearing on this case. Selling marijuana is a not a crime that Mr Hollywood was even charged with. There are marijuana dispensaries throughout the State of California. This should not have been an issue with any of the jurors but considering the statement by one of the jurors, it was a factor in convicting him of murder in the 1st degree.
Justice doesn't mean lock em up and throw away the key...Justice is FAIR and IMPARTIAL. I do not believe that Mr Hollywood recieved a fair trial nor do I believe that the prosecutors came even close to proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of 1st degree murder with special circumstances.

Justice For ALL

JJH 27 Jan 2010 : 1/27/2010

The jury found JJH guilty of simple kidnapping, which ended when Markowitz was murdered. Therefor, JJH can be sentenced to death or LWOP. Also the jury found JJH guilty of solicitation of murder, they believed that JJH asked Hoyt to do the job. That charge also gets death or LWOP. Twice cooked white trash . . .

Short Order Chef

: 1/27/2010

I can see how the jurors came to their decision based on what they heard in court , but what about the vast amount of evidence from the defense that was not allowed? The whole story would have made a big difference. The entire trial was biased from the start. If the judge does not consider the statements from the juror #3 regarding jury misconduct, it will prove the unfairness of the whole thing.

RPTolefson

: 1/27/2010

The jury would not have believed that Mr. Hollywood ordered the murder of Nick Markowitz if they had been allowed to see the signed documents and confessions from the other participants and been allowed to see the sworn testimony from those previous cases!

Lock Him UP : 1/27/2010

I think anyone who sells marijuana should be locked up for as long as possible. Even if Hollywood didn't have anything to do with Nicks murder, I don't care if he ever gets out. My son smokes marijuana and he hates my guts even though I used to take him to the zoo all the time. It is all Jesse Hollywood's fault that my son thinks I'm a jerk!! String him up..

Concerned Parent

Hollywood Seeks New TRrial : 1/27/2010

To Concerned Parent ... my concern is that there are a lot of "parents" out there like you who make up our jury pool. Now that's scary!! Unfortunately its also the truth. BTW Short Order the only thing they actually decided he was guilty of was simple kidnapping, they never even had to discuss if he asked or didnt ask anyone to solicit murder that just came along with the kidnapping & the poor jury instructions. The jury was asked to interpret the law rather than to apply the law.

HAL

Hal : 1/28/2010

If it weren't for marijuana dealers like Jesse Hollywood, life in Santa Barbara would be much better. Not only does my pothead son hate my guts, but his mother, my ex-wife is hosing the pool boy who is also a stoner, in MY house. I wish I could have gotten on that jury, but I wasn't eligible because I now live in a trailer in Palmcaster. So don't come crying to me about justice or evidence, buster. He;s lucky they didn't send him to the gas chamber!!

Concerned Father

HAL : 1/28/2010

How do you know what the jury discussed??? The jury deliberated on several charges: Simple kidnapping, aggravated kidnapping, murger while a kidnapping was underway, and solicitation of murder. They found JJH NOT guilty of aggravated kidnapping because that was not premeditated. They found him guilty of all the other charges. JJH admitted to simple kidnapping, so the fact that Nick died during kidnapping pretty much cooked his goose.

Short Order Chef

Hollywood New Trial : 1/28/2010

Short Order: Yes,they found him NOT GUILTY of aggravated kidnapping 1) no premeditation AND 2) because there was no evidence of request for money (the $1,200 drug debt) NONE ZERO ZIP. Because even tho the prosecution tried to argue the defenses theory at the last minute during closing arguments, which after clearing the courtroom of JURY & PRESS the JUDGE ADMONISHED them for, they still could not find Hollywood guilty of kidnapping for extortion. He was found guilty of Murder & aggravated murder because of the kidnapping. It didnt matter if they thought he had ANYTHING to do with it or NOT ... get it. They didnt have to discuss it ... it was a done deal as far as they were concerned ... & I do know what the jury discussed.

HAL

Trial by media : 1/28/2010

Jesse James Hollywood didn't stand a chance for a fair trial. The major motion picture alpha dog claiming to be "based on the story of Jesse James Hollywood" as it's ad,solely from the DA's version was screened by members of the jury. The press kept attributing this murder to a drug debt when the testimony and facts of the case as presented told a very different story. Apparently too late for the truth to be heard. Did you know that Jesse was convicted under the Felony Murder Rule simply because he admitted to being there in the initial taking of Nick Markowitz? Did you know they did not find proof of intent because there was no proof on intent presented? We're talking PROOF here. Just another example of the media slant here in this very article saying that Nick was killed by Hollywood's gun, forgetting to mention that the grand jury testimony of key witness of the prosecution put the gun in Ryan Hoyt's posession and his testimony was changed for this trial to hang JJH. Apparently too, it's okay to lie as long as it's for the prosecution. This is just to name a few of the unscrupulous tactics used by the DA in this hanging!

Innocent of murder : 1/28/2010

I think we all know that Jesse James Hollywood is not "innocent". Just avoiding the facts again to argue that point. JJH came forward and admitted to his involment in taking Nick Markowitz, he admitted to selling marijuana and admitted to having guns etc. None of those things make for proof of murder or intent to commit murder. Innocent of murder is what Matt's mom was saying and to most that was clear. There was no proof that JJH ordered a murder and there was plenty of evidence that proved he did not. I'm sorry for your loss. I have my own loss as most people do. Revenge should not stand in the way of justice. xo

Justine

Terrible tragedy : 1/29/2010

It is absolutely ridiculous to read the comments by people who are actually trying to defend Hollywood. He is just as much to blame as Hoyt. He used his power as an influential friend and conned someone into doing his dirty work for him so he could worm his way out of it. Innocent people don't run and hide 5 years and i hope he is sent to jail for life and taken care of the olden ways when someone who kills an innocent child goes to jail.
I am truly sorry for the Markowitz family and hope one day you can see the man who cut your sons life short, put to death for a horrific crime.

Proof : 1/29/2010

To the writer of terrible tragedy. On that, I wholey agree. I feel your pain but unfortunately your hatred and revenge is not well hidden as it tries to hide in the guise of "justice". Unfortunately too, is the fact that a man has been convicted without PROOF of intent or action. That's the point. Be this anyone, no matter what we may THINK happened or have been led to believe happened, A CONVICTION TAKING AWAY SOMEONE'S LIFE SHOULD REQUIRE PROOF. This one simply did not. That's all we're saying. Seems that so many continue to miss that very important point. Do the miss it or are the too afraid to see it and let go of their hatred and revenge? I don't know. What has happened here is a terrible tragedy too. If you have the capacity to feel that pain you will understand. There has been two tragedies here. Love and peace

Danielle

The law is never open to debate! : 1/29/2010

The law is extremely strict and is never open to debate. Under the law Hollywood is guilty of murder if he participated in any felony that results in death. Even if anybody believes Hollywood's garbage story that he did not order the murder he is still guilty of murder one by virtue of the kidnapping which he admitted he participated in. The law is extremely strict and very clear on this point. If I order a guy to rob a store and the guy I hired shoots the clerk without my knowing it or ordering it I am still guilty of murder because I instigated the robbery. Hollywood instigated the kidnapping and despite Blatt's efforts to say that Hollywood ended the kidnapping by ordering the release of Markowitz that is fantasy. The kidnapping did not end until the final shot that ended his life.

Professor Hugo Donovan

Guilty Guilty Guilty : 1/29/2010

Thanks Prof for laying it down so clearly!!

Short Order Chef

not an open-and-shut case : 1/30/2010

The "professor" is obviously not a law professor. Kidnapping does not equate to murder. If this were true, William Skidmore is also guilty of murder. And if this were true, the prosecutors wasted many weeks trying to PROVE beyond reasonable doubt that Hollywood ordered the murder. Perhaps Hollywood did order it, but their evidence was weak.
And the "end" of the kidnapping (in this case) is certainly open to debate.

Ryan In LA

Yes it does : 1/30/2010

When you participate in a felony such as kidnapping, when the end result is death than it does become murder. Most rational people believe Hollywood ordered the shooting, but even if he didn't the law is extremely clear, Hollywood's participation in the kidnapping automatically makes him guilty of murder. The law on that is extremely strict and never open to debate. The kidnapping did not end until Hoyt shot the victim dead. There is no middle ground allowed by the California Supreme Court. Under the law any participation in a felony that results in death is murder no matter what. Hollywood cannot escape responsibility by trying to claim that he ended the kidnapping and told Hoyt to take Ryan home. Under the law the judge correctly told the jury that the kidnapping did not end. The law is never open to debate. Judge Hill is required to follow the law as laid out by the California Supreme Court and the California Supreme Court has held that kidnapping does not end until the victim is either released or the victim is killed. No matter what Ryan or James Blatt say the law does not favor Hollywood at all.

Professor

Professor : 1/31/2010

Judge Gordon who presided over Rugge's case ruled correctly, that the Felony Murder rule could NOT even be argued, as the prosecutions own witnesses testified that the kidnapping ended and Nick was free to leave at any time, just as they did in Hollywood's case. Rugge was subsequently found NOT guilty of murder in the case and he admitted driving the van in the initial kidnapping. You are just shooting your mouth off and have little or no knowledge of the law. Professor my a**.....

Jerry Spence

Professor : 2/1/2010

You are completely wrong. Judge Gordon is the one who violated the law. The California Supreme Court has ruled that kidnapping never ends until the victim is dead or released. The law is the law and Judge Hill's rulings were all strictly by the book. I have no respect for people who disagree with Chief Justice George. When this case goes up on appeal it will be quickly affirmed because Judge Hill obeyed all the state supreme court demands. Like the movie issue was ruled on by the court. James Blatt arguing the movie was unfair and biased his client is outrageous because Chief Justice George already ruled that the DA did nothing wrong and Chief Justice George forbids people to disagree with his rulings.

Professor!!

there may be a positive.. : 2/1/2010

The SB community may benefit if the JJH verdict and sentencing stands. I see this as precedent. If there is any gang kid that gets stabbed to death for gang retaliation, then the DA must arrest and charge the whole gang! Imagine now the whole east or westside gang, everyone of them, guilty of murder by their affliation. This trial may just CLEAN out whole crime squads out of SB!!!! Right or wrong, this is how I view these arguments against JJH. So I plead to public, the next stabbing, the DA better round up the entire gang and charge them ALL with murder!!!

Boycott Boy

Professor : 2/1/2010

I coundn't agree more with professor Donavan. It is Judge Gordon who should be kicked off the bench for giving local weed slinger, Jesse Rugge the benifit of that outrageous illegal ruling!! The State Supreme Court should have been called in to fix that one up too. Then maybe Rugge would be right where he belongs next to Hoyt. Can we the people of Santa Barbara get a retrial on that one? And who the hell does this Blatt guy think he is? As the professor clearly stated:" Chief Justice George forbids people to disagree with his rulings". Pretty clear, wouldn't you say? Tricky drug lawyers should be ashamed of themselves. Because of them, I live in a trailer in Palm-Caster while my ex wife lounges around my house in Santa Barbara all day with some doper, and my son laughs at me...Jesse Hollywood and his posse are directly responsible for my pathetic miserable life. So don't come crying to me about junk like judicial error, jury misconduct, or prosecutorial whatever. That's all just legal mumbo jumbo.

Concerned Father

: 2/2/2010

check out www.advocatesfortruthandjustice.com

truthseeker

California Supreme Court decisions are never allowed to be challenged! : 2/2/2010

At least part of the claims the web site makes are patently immoral. In California when there is a particular controversial issue in order to end public debate the case is heard by the state supreme court.
James Blatt argued that the DA's making the movie was so patently prejudicial that the DA had to be removed from the case. It was a legitimate issue open to debate which is why the state supreme court took the case to resolve the debate.
The California Supreme Court reviewed a ton of documents and heard oral arguments. In the end the California Supreme Court rejected all of Blatt's arguments. The court found that while the DA's office should have exercised more caution there was no misconduct at all and that Hollywood was not prejudiced in the slightest. It is unethical and immoral for Blatt to disagree with the State Supreme Court and raise the issue again with Judge Hill. The California Supreme Court thoroughly reviewed every aspect of the DA's participation in the movie and found no misconduct. I can accept James Blatt litigating unresolved issues but I will never forgive Blatt for revisiting an issue already decided by Chief Justice Ronald George. The California Supreme Court has the final say in all criminal cases regarding California and under the law all their decisions are final and never open to debate.

Professor!!

: 2/3/2010

Whacky Professor:
Various "Supreme Courts", both Federal and State have made countless idiotic decisions that were later completely reversed. Have you ever heard of the Dred Scott decision? The California Supreme Court ruled on several cases affirming the illegal imprisonment of Japanese Americans during WWII. They also ruled in favor of local politicians who stole the land and other private property of those who were wrongly imprisoned. Your statements:" It is unethical and immoral for Blatt to disagree with the State Supreme Court and raise the issue again with Judge Hill." and, "The California Supreme Court has the final say in all criminal cases regarding California and under the law all their decisions are final and never open to debate." prove beyond any reasonable doubt that you are an ignorant crackpot with little or no understanding of the law. I would guess that you are most likely one of the jurors on the Hollywood case who facilitated this railroading. You fool no one with an above room temperature IQ...Thanks

Equal Justice Under The Law

Railroading : 2/3/2010

JJH is the conductor of his own train. Hopefully he will be moved to a new jail after Friday's sentencing so he can settle down and reflect on all the damage he's done . . .

Amtrack Dude

Nothing unexpected : 2/5/2010

Hollywood will never, ever, ever get a new trial.

Hollywood New Trial : 2/6/2010

"Professor" (of what we wonder)
The kidnapping ended when Nick was driving around town with two young girls, when he was driving with a SANTA BARBARA parent & NONE of the boys involved in the kidnapping. When he was asked if he wanted to go home. When he no longer was under threat or harm. Not when JJH ORDERED him to be returned by Hoyt. He never ordered anything. He asked Hoyt to bring him home.

HAL

Peception vs. reality : 2/25/2010

Only two people on the planet know the truth for certain, Ryan Hoyt and Jesse James Hollywood. It is not our duty to form opinion. That is a luxury we are afforded in America. More times than not, our perception is not reality. Be it with sports figures, movie stars or politicians. When it comes to criminals we base our opinions on what we hear in the media and the amount of evidence produced shared by them.
But a court of law is supposed to cut thru mere perception and base innocence or guilt solely on FACT.
In the case of Jesse James Hollywood, that was NOT done. Much less "beyond a reasonable doubt." I don't know if Jesse James Hollywood told Hoyt to execute Nick Markowitz or not. And neither do YOU. Only Hollywood and Hoyt know that for FACT. And unless that is proven BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT thru first hand eyewitness testimony, recorded conversation, or UNCORRUPTED confession, a person MUST be found innocent.
Otherwise, EVERYONE'S FREEDOM can be taken away simply by the people in power. Ordinary people don't stand a chance against these people, especially if the media and movie makers conspire to convince the public.
Mrs. Markowitz's feelings, anger, loss, and love for her son (although understood comletely) have no bearing on who is responsible. Her loss and the murder are two separate issues (unfortunate, but TRUE.)
Jesse James Hollywood, guilty or innocent, DID NOT RECEIVE A FAIR TRIAL. And that is what all this is about.

JJH