Trezelle's attorneys barely bother to ask cross, especially the children but there is Stallings going on long repetitive questioning to a tired 12 y/o that had little value to JWs defense.I detest Stallings, I really do!!!
Last edited:
Trezelle's attorneys barely bother to ask cross, especially the children but there is Stallings going on long repetitive questioning to a tired 12 y/o that had little value to JWs defense.I detest Stallings, I really do!!!
I hope the juror's feel the same way we do regarding her tactics ...Trezelle's attorneys barely bothers to ask cross, especially the children but there is Stallings going on long repetitive questioning to a tired 12 y/o that had little value to JWs defense.
Yes, it is apparent their deaths were not accidents or a mistake, they were purposely abused and neglected. I would not say the 12 y/o was complicit though. He only knew about the death of Orrin because he lived in the home and witnessed it. He did not participate in anything but to keep a secret his parents asked of him out of fear of losing his family.I am convinced the parents caused the boy's deaths. It wasn't an accident they covered up, they're not covering for the actions of one of the kids or an extended family member. They abused them, they neglected them, they refused to seek outside help for them, and they made their own child complicit in their crimes.
While it's possible the defense will present something that changes my mind; at this point I'm beyond a reasonable doubt.
Did you hear her questioning the boy late in the day going over and over with questions that had no rhyme or reason? They seemed to be going no where and only tired and confused the boy.I hope the juror's feel the same way we do regarding her tactics ...
Did you hear the testimony from the older sibling of the other two adoptive boys? She’s so far the one who is doing most of the mistreatment, unless I’ve missed something mentioning Trezell?If JW had any love for her kids she would have plead for mercy and gave up Trezelle and where the boys were placed.
Maybe she could have worked a deal to get a short sentence and be back out to be with her 2 children even if raised by someone else.
But she is ride or die like TW stated and she is guilty of the abuse too so hopefully she will never get to raise another child again.
Now I understand why this trial is not being live streamed. Very say that these boys must testify for justice to be served.Those poor kids.
We knew it would be bad to hear the boys testify! Why, oh why, did TW and JW put those boys through this?
Alford Plea, anyone?
jmho ymmv lrr
At least the children are finished for now. I am sure Stallings will have them back next week.Another day of trial. Sigh.
You are correct in we have only heard about JW being abusive but something about him carrying that stick around for defense makes me think she is not alone in the abuse. He may have only just helped with chopping up food and putting it in a baby bottle and not getting help for Orrin when he was dying and possibly disposing of the children bodies.Did you hear the testimony from the older sibling of the other two adoptive boys? She’s so far the one who is doing most of the mistreatment, unless I’ve missed something mentioning Trezell?
The joke with her Mom regarding missing socks? Does that sound like someone who truly cared or was intimidated by her husband?
She said it was dark. She was in the front passenger. I would think she would want to see them at least, it had been 10 months since she had seen them. She may have poor eyesight or just was used to not seeing them.How can you be in a van, told kids are asleep in the back, and not "see" them?! We have a Honda Odyssey, I would sure as heck know if there were kids in the back.
They are toddlers, they would still be in car seats. Any van I have ever driven, or been in, you can see if there are kids in the van, in car seats.
I can see where, with the recommendation to rear face car seats for toddlers as long as possible it could be entirely possible that she might not have seen where they would have been(had they actually been there, which I don't believe they were. ) jmoShe said it was dark. She was in the front passenger. I would think she would want to see them at least, it had been 10 months since she had seen them. She may have poor eyesight or just was used to not seeing them.
I do not think she is trying to cover for her son but may have not been that close to Orrin and Orson because they were not around with her much.
I do not think it allowed to reverse seat car seats, that was changed years ago. But yes, they were not in the van.I can see where, with the recommendation to rear face car seats for toddlers as long as possible it could be entirely possible that she might not have seen where they would have been(had they actually been there, which I don't believe they were. ) jmo