Search results

I am not shocked by the hung jury, and don't feel it is anyone's fault on the jury. I feel that way by simply looking at our discussions here. While I and others see the trial as having PROVED that KR couldn't have hit JOK and therefore was innocent of the charges, I have to recognize and...

"Speedy trial" is ALWAYS a relative term, and the statutory limits can be stretched when it is "necessary." A good example is LVD's trial in ID, in which she never let go of her speedy trial rights at any point, and yet she didn't come to trial for years. In that case, the court had to...

I think it was one step farther than that - the CW and the Defense together proved KR's car did not (and could not) have hit JOK. And of course ... If KR's car did not hit, you must acquit! NOT GUILTY.

We should give credit to Judge Bev for leaving a heated interaction (where she was clearly annoyed that AJ a pushy attorney was telling her what to do), then she left but continued to reflect on the question (and probably the interaction) further, and in essence coming back to say "I was wrong"...

There's one piece of proof that is more important than the rest put together - which is, did KR's car actually hit JOK? The unbiased testimony of the FBI elite experts in finding what was physically possible, and what was not, made that answer a clear and unchallenged no. It could NOT have hit...

I think the best evidence - objective Experts, the best of the best, who didn't speak for either side, and simply presented their observations as Experts - made it literally impossible that KR did anything wrong. They even said that. Not possible. They concluded, on a scientific basis, it was...

When trying to put the pieces together, I've pretty much landed here ^. The second part, not the first. I don't think there was a plan to attack/kill JOK. But I think it was a situation where one thing led to another, the dog jumped in to "defend" someone, and he got dead, and then they covered...

"Looks like manslaughter to me, or involuntary. " Someone might think that (although I think the evidence has been too weak and the witnesses too conflicting to convict on anything -- they are presenting possibilities, and self-contradictory claims, but nothing that pushes the needle). But I...

VERY unlikely. They would not have evidence ie things they personally observed. All the prosec attys have is (inadmissible) hearsay to offer, layers removed from being their own testimony to things that happened. AZ needs the witnesses to things pertaining to AZ (only) crimes and things...

I think Autry was the ringleader in her killing. (He testified he was with Adams, but did almost nothing, thereby putting a story in the court record that made him appear to be a relatively innocent bystander. But he was there.) If he insists on recanting his story, he needs to be prosecuted...

It needs to be said that the jury did NOT actually decide on the DP for CD. The jury made a determination of the facts - whether each murder contained aggravating circumstances by being (a) for remuneration, or (b) especially heinous, capricious, or exceptionally cruel - and then whether there...

It may be a while. Since everyone is already here, Boyce wants to go ahead and rule on the other charges, rather than delay it for another day. So far, no objection seems to be arising, so it will take a while to work through that process in a proper way.

I'm not, of course, but the ID process leaves the jurors emotions (about the DP) entirely out of the equation, and instead focuses them on deciding the merits of underlying reasons for which (in this case) there was no doubt whatsoever imo. And I think you and all the others here would agree...

This is a clean sweep in favor of the DP in all respects. DP x 3 is a "just" sentence for all of these reasons, says the jury.

I think he gets the DP x 3. The crimes were incredibly callused and cruel. Kids were killed. So was a sweet trusting wife. And there's not a sliver of remorse for his actions. I can understand why jurors would take their time - because a moral person doesn't want to be casual with someone...

I watched the entire hearing in real time, and Nikynoo is right on track. There was a sequence of events, and taking one of them out of context doesn't tell the story. 1 CD/JP filed a motion to be removed from the case, and have a state-appointed DP counsel appointed. 2 Boyce had a hearing to...

She IS tainted. Its not a Prior thing. Watching the testimony of others, before you testify, is the very definition of that situation.

Please don't interject into the narrative the false idea that LE and ME's didn't look for signs of foul play in AC's death. Because that's the OPPOSITE from what happened. When AC died, LE was all over it. They were of the same mind as any one of us, and instantly (!) assumed he had been...

We know MB was killed by handgun, not a taser or anything else. (The idea of things like hammer, ice pick, etc arose before we knew what actually killed her.) Multiple weapons seems incredibly unlikely. imo

Strong evidence No evidence whatsoever there is a minimum of two. None. FIFY.