SleuthSayer
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2008
- Messages
- 374
- Reaction score
- 0
Well, to clarify what I was trying to say... I still find the calls somewhat suspicious. Knowing that they were to voicemail isn't enough to convince me that he didn't do it.Exactly. I stopped what I was doing work wise to watch that testimony. I was on the edge of my seat ready to hear exactly what he did with those calls. And it was listening to work voicemails. Honestly, that isn't something someone does right after murdering their wife while still trying to cover it up. The first call was made a few minutes before the call from Nancy. It had to be legitimate work calls. And I simply can't believe he would mix the 2 at the same time.
But, my point was that IMHO, the prosecution did a poor job of presenting this. For me, it ended up having the reverse effect of what they were hoping for. My guess is that it may have done the same for the jury. The way he was so slowly and methodically working up to it, you could almost hear the dramatic "Unsolved Mysteries" narrator saying "Brad dialed the extension for voicemail, but he wasn't checking messages" (cue ominous music).
However, in the end, it was kind of a letdown. If I'm sitting in the jury, maybe I'm taking copious notes: "He pressed a '1', then he pressed a '3'", etc, thinking that it's leading somewhere big. Then, I'm thinking "well, crap, he just checked voicemail. Why didn't you just say that? You went an awful long way to tell me that he didn't do something illegal/nefarious".