GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #11

[Dmacky]

Seriously? She became an attorney while sitting in jail? That's a hoot! Although, I'd probably do the same thing as it seems one would have a lot of time on their hands.

LOL * Sorry la2, that was a joke. After trying unsuccessfully to FIRE her attorney, she has now decided to "represent" herself. She is a narcissistic sociopath to the fullest ~

 

[Bernina]

This statement always makes me shake my head. Do people honestly still think the wife can deny the father access to the child in event of a divorce because she's pissed about an affair? Granted it happens but usually only if the Dad doesn't fight for rights. She can certainly make life difficult, badmouth the Dad, etc. but I don't know of any cases where the courts came back and said "you cheated, you don't get to see your kid anymore." Now "you murdered someone, you don't get to see your kids anymore" - that I can imagine (although haven't seen it myself).

Yep, there's this little thing called "No Fault Divorce". And California IS a No Fault Divorce State.


Either CL was totally ignorant of the divorce laws in Cali and NL was blowing smoke, or EC was totally ignorant of the same and CL was blowing smoke. (some states back East have some real stringent divorce laws)

Tennessee Divorce:

http://www.divorcesource.com/ds/tennessee/tennessee-divorce-laws-716.shtml

A divorce will be granted by the Tennessee court upon the following grounds:

No-Fault:
(1) irreconcilable differences if: [a] there has been no denial of this ground; the spouses submit a properly signed marital dissolution agreement (see below under Simplified or Special Divorce Procedures); or [c] this grounds for divorce is combined with a general fault-based grounds or (2) living separate and apart without cohabitation for 2 years when there are no minor children.

Fault:
(1) impotence; (2) adultery; (3) conviction of a felony and imprisonment; (4) alcoholism and/or drug addiction; (5) wife is pregnant by another at the time of marriage without husband's knowledge; (6) willful desertion for 1 year; (7) bigamy; (8) endangering the life of the spouse; (9) conviction of an infamous crime; (10) refusing to move to Tennessee with a spouse and willfully absenting oneself from a new residence for 2 years; (11) cruel and inhuman treatment or unsafe and improper marital conduct; (12) indignities that make the spouse's life intolerable; and (13) abandonment, neglect, or banning the spouse from the home. (Tennessee Code - Volume 6A, Title 36, Sections 36-4-101 and 36-4-103)

California Divorce:

http://www.divorcesource.com/ds/california/california-divorce-laws-662.shtml

The Petition for Dissolution of Marriage must declare the appropriate California grounds upon which the dissolution of marriage is being sought. The appropriate lawful ground will be that which the parties agree upon and can substantiate, or that which the filing spouse desires to prove to the court. The dissolution of marriage grounds are as follows:

The effect of a judgment of dissolution of marriage when it becomes final is to restore the parties to the state of unmarried persons.

Dissolution of the marriage or legal separation of the parties may be based on either of the following grounds, which shall be pleaded generally: (a) Irreconcilable differences, which have caused the irremediable breakdown of the marriage. (b) Incurable insanity.

Irreconcilable differences are those grounds which are determined by the court to be substantial reasons for not continuing the marriage and which make it appear that the marriage should be dissolved.

A marriage may be dissolved on the grounds of incurable insanity only upon proof, including competent medical or psychiatric testimony, that the insane spouse was at the time the petition was filed, and remains, incurably insane.

No dissolution of marriage granted on the ground of incurable insanity relieves a spouse from any obligation imposed by law as a result of the marriage for the support of the spouse who is incurably insane, and the court may make such order for support. (California Code - Sections: 2310)

 

[77DarkHorse7]

They never actually said when this supposed internet search happened. For all I know it could have happened after she went missing. Maybe he suspected he knew who did it, and was concerned whether that person hid the body enough, or maybe he wanted to solve the crime himself. It was someone he cared about who disappeared, after all. thought bubble->{if someone killed her, I can find out who and be the hero. I'll start by looking for the body..... They'd want to get rid of it, how would they try to do that?} Search.

 

[heartgoesout]

^ There was only one arrest.

 

[FlamingoLady]

CL's statement that he feared losing his child along with him deciding murder was the answer, makes little sense either. I mean, talk about making sure you're going to lose, not only your child, but your whole life.

If anyone is interested, I caught an episode of Dateline Saturday Night Mystery, S22/Ep52, (2013), last night. "Under the Desert Sky" took place in Nevada where Kody Patten and Toni Fratto were the perpetrators and Micaela Costanzo, the victim. Very brutal murder that involved a perceived love triangle.

I watched that too! I totally think the girlfriend was the instigator in that murder. Did not believe a thing she said. Just my opinion, of course.

 

[heartgoesout]

If Nichole Lee is arrested we could more seriously speculate who done what, when, and where. She's still just a POI. The evidence points to CL. Unless there is specific evidence of someone else's involvement, CL's gonna take the fall.

 

[Mamamerced]

They never actually said when this supposed internet search happened. For all I know it could have happened after she went missing. Maybe he suspected he knew who did it, and was concerned whether that person hid the body enough, or maybe he wanted to solve the crime himself. It was someone he cared about who disappeared, after all. thought bubble->{if someone killed her, I can find out who and be the hero. I'll start by looking for the body..... They'd want to get rid of it, how would they try to do that?} Search.

Sounds like you're trying to establish reasonable doubt. Are you on CL's defense team?

 

[Fascinated1]

Yep, there's this little thing called "No Fault Divorce". And California IS a No Fault Divorce State.


Either CL was totally ignorant of the divorce laws in Cali and NL was blowing smoke, or EC was totally ignorant of the same and CL was blowing smoke. (some states back East have some real stringent divorce laws)

Tennessee Divorce:

http://www.divorcesource.com/ds/tennessee/tennessee-divorce-laws-716.shtml



California Divorce:

http://www.divorcesource.com/ds/california/california-divorce-laws-662.shtml

How about Alaska though? Assume the lees were residents there (car had tags and that's where they returned).

 

[rosesfromangels]

Here's my SPECULATION on how this case is going to play out. The prosecution has to disclose their case to the defense at some point. CL's attorney will determine the risk factor/probability of a conviction. (Based on what we know so far it seems *very* high probability of conviction). At a certain point, I believe CL's attorney will attempt to plea bargain by offering up information on other individuals involved with the crime. Of which, I believe there are accomplices. OPINION AND SPECULATION only.

Time will tell....

 

[Bernina]

How about Alaska though? Assume the lees were residents there (car had tags and that's where they returned). Would moms or dads state of residency matter? Or is it where conceived?

It's all about "residency" prior to filing, California has 6 months, Alaska has 30 days.

Main site: http://www.divorcesource.com/ just click the State.

 

[Lovejac]

Reasonable doubt has to be reasonable

 

[rosesfromangels]

Reasonable doubt has to be reasonable

And here is the legal definition:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Doubt

 

[Seajay]

It's all about "residency" prior to filing, California has 6 months, Alaska has 30 days.

Main site: http://www.divorcesource.com/ just click the State.

I think as far as child support, etc. The jurisdiction would be probably her home state, unless she decided to file while JC was still in the Marines and she opted to stay with him.

The divorce would be from the state of origin if he were to divorce NL. They were married in Alaska, the divorce would have to come from Alaska.

Somehow I either can't read worth beans or we are talking about two different things. I thought we were talking about CL being afraid of not seeing his kid if NL divorced him. All those decisions would come from AK.

If it's about Erin filing for child support or paternity, that would come from wherever she is at the time. I believe she can do it from either TN or CA or wherever she was.

 

[Bernina]

here's my speculation on how this case is going to play out. The prosecution has to disclose their case to the defense at some point. Cl's attorney will determine the risk factor/probability of a conviction. (based on what we know so far it seems *very* high probability of conviction). At a certain point, i believe cl's attorney will attempt to plea bargain by offering up information on other individuals involved with the crime. Of which, i believe there are accomplices. Opinion and speculation only.

Time will tell....

ITA.........I don't see CL taking the fall without taking all involved/POI's down, ie. "plea agreement".

But.... LE and prosecutors are kind of iffy when it comes to charging/convicting spouses (just saying) unless the crime is really egregious. They really have to have infallible evidence and co-conspirators can change their statements at the drop of a hat.
*wondering if NL has an attorney?*


Have to believe CL was a complete moron, he left a trail of "bread crumbs" that lead LE right to him, all they had to do was get their ducks in a row. Kind of makes you wonder what the witness responded with when CL asked about disposing of a body. <That might have led them to the general area where EC was found.

This case is sooooo "Loose lips sink ships".

 

[Fascinated1]

I think as far as child support, etc. The jurisdiction would be probably her home state, unless she decided to file while JC was still in the Marines and she opted to stay with him.

The divorce would be from the state of origin if he were to divorce NL. They were married in Alaska, the divorce would have to come from Alaska.

Somehow I either can't read worth beans or we are talking about two different things. I thought we were talking about CL being afraid of not seeing his kid if NL divorced him. All those decisions would come from AK.

If it's about Erin filing for child support or paternity, that would come from wherever she is at the time. I believe she can do it from either TN or CA or wherever she was.

Yes sorry!! Got distracted and did mix my thoughts. But thanks for answering both of them .

 

[Bernina]

I think as far as child support, etc. The jurisdiction would be probably her home state, unless she decided to file while JC was still in the Marines and she opted to stay with him.

The divorce would be from the state of origin if he were to divorce NL. They were married in Alaska, the divorce would have to come from Alaska.

Somehow I either can't read worth beans or we are talking about two different things. I thought we were talking about CL being afraid of not seeing his kid if NL divorced him. All those decisions would come from AK.

If it's about Erin filing for child support or paternity, that would come from wherever she is at the time. I believe she can do it from either TN or CA or wherever she was.

Divorces are granted in the State you have current residency in, NOT the State you were married in. Child support is enforced by the State the support is issued from, it goes into a National data base that sets up garnishments for wages, tax returns, lottery winnings, etc. But to get the State to follow through, you have to set a fire under them in many cases.

 

[Voice4theSilent]

Is there a source that they found bullets on the scene? The incriminating evidence that they had so far was listed in the arrest affidavit, including the computer searches. And her phone WAS disabled according to the sheriff, um probable cause statement "sometime after Erin left with Lee, her phone was de-activated(turned off)". http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1225468-1765-001.html

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/19/us/california-missing-marine-wife/

Um, you stated he "disabled ALL the cell phones". We know Erin's was disabled but we don't know if his was. As a matter of fact, in the below linked article in MSM (CNN, to be exact) it states, "Authorities used cell phone information to narrow the search area to 300 square miles."

Is there a source that they DIDN'T find bullets at the scene (or in her body?) Not saying that they did (as we do not know right now) but we shouldn't be concluding, with no autopsy results released, that they didn't and therefor CL must have dug the bullets out of her body.

Not ALL incriminating evidence was listed in the arrest warrant (for one, because it was created immediately after Erin's body was removed from the scene prior to the autopsy being performed, forensic analysis on the evidence at the scene, etc.) Further, LE has stated that there was more evidence at the scene that has not been released to the public. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2728658/Sheriff-Ex-Marine-inquired-body-disposal.html

If all of the evidence was listed in detail in the arrest warrant than there would be no use for discovery in a case. We don't know much of anything in detail that the Prosecution and LE know at this point.....and claiming to isn't accurate. Neither is stating that if it hasn't been released to us thus far than it doesn't exist. LE is under no obligation to lay out their case against CL to the public at this stage in the game.

 

[Seajay]

Divorces are granted in the State you have current residency in, NOT the State you were married in. Child support is enforced by the State the support is issued from, it goes into a National data base that sets up garnishments for wages, tax returns, lottery winnings, etc. But to get the State to follow through, you have to set a fire under them in many cases.

Not necessarily. My daughter got married in CA. They later moved to AZ. When the married fell apart she had to come back to CA to file for divorce. Of course, I also think it was a DIY divorce. That was considered their place of residency at the time of the marriage. It's convoluted at best.

I suppose whatever state you are in your can file for divorce, but it has to go through the state in which the marriage was made.

 

[Lovejac]

And here is the legal definition:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Doubt

Don't we wish the definition of 'reasonable' in the mind of some was as clearly defined :wink:

 

[cluciano63]

Jmo, the laws of divorce, seeing kids after a divorce, etc are irrelevant as I doubt CL ever considered all of that. Imo he just wanted Erin out of the way of his future life plans and did not want his family affected. Jmo