Deceased/Not Found CA - Sierra LaMar, 15, Morgan Hill, 16 March 2012 #22 *A. Garcia-Torres guilty*

[OldSteve]

Today we learned "reason" why turkey baster was purchased - BUT, why wasn't it in his trunk if purpose was as stated...
The "no hair on rope" when first found bugs me.. How much of her DNA has been found in his car, on his gloves, etc...
His DNA being found on pants...but test might not be accurate.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Don't be surprised if he is convicted of the 3 charges of attempted kidnap ping or even lesser charges. But I still have my doubts about him being convicted of Sierra .
Living here and hearing things from the day it happened till now. And with the Bombshell of some of the DNA evidence now not being solid like the DA lead us all to believe. Makes me wonder. Along with the fact I said this from day 1 he does not seem smart enough to hide a body this well .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It doesnt take smarts to hide a body. He had hours upon hours to drive where he finally put her body before anyone even knew she was missing.. Many defendants have been tried and convicted with the body of the victim never located. Unless someone knows the general area where the suspect put the body it becomes nothing but guess work. That is why many bodies are never found. Some are found by happenstance years later by a fisherman, hunter, camper who go into areas others dont often go into.

I dont have one doubt about his guilt. He kidnapped, raped and murdered Sierra. It is common for perverts like he is to elevate their sexual crimes to murdering the victims they raped. When he failed with the other three women he then changed his MO and target. This time he kidnapped a young vulnerable girl who was all alone with no one else around.

 

[Moxie Vi]

Today we learned "reason" why turkey baster was purchased - BUT, why wasn't it in his trunk if purpose was as stated...
The "no hair on rope" when first found bugs me.. How much of her DNA has been found in his car, on his gloves, etc...
His DNA being found on pants...but test might not be accurate.

After the Casey Anthony trial I trust very little that is said in opening statements especially if it's a new revelation. Once testimony backs up the assertions made in the opening statements I will give them credence. This goes for things said by both the prosecution as well as the defense. I haven't been as into the details with this case so much of it will be new.

 

[Leader6518]

tracey kaplan ‏@tkaplanreport 1m1 minute ago
Re Sierra's phone being on network after 10 pm, Garcia-Torres was home. "It creates a rock-solid alibi for Mr. Garcia-Torres," Lopez says.
tracey kaplan ‏@tkaplanreport 1m1 minute ago
"What they r presenting to u is not reliable," he adds.

Shades of Baez.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

JDB, nothing really surprises me anymore in jury trials. But I don't think we can just throw in the towel based on what a defense attorney says in opening statement. I think we have to have faith that there is still a chance that justice will prevail. Otherwise, there is no sense in taking any case to court, imo.

Especially since we have seen many times before where defense lawyers have gotten up in opening statements and flat out lied and couldn't prove any of the things they said.

 

[krkrjx]

Can someone who actually does twitter and tweets please send a tweet to one (or more) or the reporters and let them know that we don't really care if questioning is "dry" we want to know what's going on and what's said. Twitter is the only way to really follow this trial and just because they think the questioning is "dry" does not mean we don't wan tto know about it. I just follow on my computer - don't have a twitter acct or I would. TIA

I agree, it's best to have it all and decide for ourselves what's of interest and what's not.

I also like to hear what else is going on in court, such as what is the defendant doing during certain testimony or during sidebars or other delay. Where is he looking, is he smirking, is he looking bored--whatever it is I want to know. This is easy to do during any down time in the process and sometimes behavior or demeanor of a defendant in court speaks volumes.

I appreciate those in the courtroom tweeting but trial by tweet is not easy for those of us not there on the scene. We need all the details, however small and whenever possible.

 

[krkrjx]

Especially since we have seen many times before where defense lawyers have gotten up in opening statements and flat out lied and couldn't prove any of the things they said.

Yes. It is not illegal for a defense attorney to lie through his teeth in any proceeding in court. His job being to try to instill reasonable doubt, he's going to "suggest" things, true or not. It's up to the jury to decide how much weight to give any statement in court.

You know, there are cases where DNA is contaminated and labs are not running to protocol and that's why attorneys think they can claim this in every case that comes to court. Just because they say it doesn't make it so, not in every case or even in most cases.

So far this case is unfolding just as I had expected it would and nothing the defense has stated so far has me alarmed.

 

[Emi]

There are some scatches from the court today, I will attach them
Also for NBC Bay Area - every day will be a different reporter

 

[Emi]

Attached are scatches

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I agree, it's best to have it all and decide for ourselves what's of interest and what's not.

I also like to hear what else is going on in court, such as what is the defendant doing during certain testimony or during sidebars or other delay. Where is he looking, is he smirking, is he looking bored--whatever it is I want to know. This is easy to do during any down time in the process and sometimes behavior or demeanor of a defendant in court speaks volumes.

I appreciate those in the courtroom tweeting but trial by tweet is not easy for those of us not there on the scene. We need all the details, however small and whenever possible.

I actually hate tweeted trials because so much important information is left out. Just like today when it was tweeted the LE's testimony was dry so very liitle information came to light about what all the officer testified to..................................

We only get what the reporters decides is important when something they omitted could have been something we really wanted to know about. It really makes the trial disjointed without all of the testimony being known.

I guess I should be thankful that we at least have that much..

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Yes. It is not illegal for a defense attorney to lie through his teeth in any proceeding in court. His job being to try to instill reasonable doubt, he's going to "suggest" things, true or not. It's up to the jury to decide how much weight to give any statement in court.

You know, there are cases where DNA is contaminated and labs are not running to protocol and that's why attorneys think they can claim this in every case that comes to court. Just because they say it doesn't make it so, not in every case or even in most cases.

So far this case is unfolding just as I had expected it would and nothing the defence has stated so far has me alarmed.

Yes, I am aware of that and openings and closing aren''t evidence. However; I think most jurors expect both side to be truthful even in openings and they will be expecting the defense to support the claims during the trial. A defense hired expert will not be enough. IMO

Saying that things were contaminated or planted is easy to say but much harder for the defense to support those allegations and the jury will be expecting him to back it up with irrefutable evidence. By the defence making these assertions it falls on them to back up those claims are lose credibility.

I am sure you are like me and have seen this defense tried many times before yet in the end the defense team were left with only unsupported claims. The defense is sort of confusing since there main defense is going to be she is a runaway. They are not going to be able to dismiss all of the evidence linking him to Sierra.

I am not the least bit worried either. I fully think he will be convicted on all charges.

 

[krkrjx]

Yes, I am aware of that and openings and closing aren''t evidence. However; I think most jurors expect both side to be truthful even in openings and they will be expecting the defense to support the claims during the trial. A defense hired expert will not be enough. IMO

Saying that things were contaminated or planted is easy to say but much harder for the defense to support those allegations and the jury will be expecting him to back it up with irrefutable evidence. By the defence making these assertions it falls on them to back up those claims are lose credibility.

I am sure you are like me and have seen this defense tried many times before yet in the end the defense team were left with only unsupported claims. The defense is sort of confusing since there main defense is going to be she is a runaway. They are not going to be able to dismiss all of the evidence linking him to Sierra.

I am not the least bit worried either. I fully think he will be convicted on all charges.

Lies during opening statements that were not backed up with evidence were believed by that infamous jury in Florida. It is possible there could be another panel assembled that are just as naive but the odds are so small that I have hope that this jury will be able to connect the dots.

 

[katydid23]

I would like more information on the hair---was it really not found until later on in the process?

 

[Emi]

Attached minute order and doc
http://scscourt.org/general_info/news_media/newspdfs/garciatorres/MtntoReleaseDocuments013117.pdf

 

[krkrjx]

emi, your baby is adorable.

 

[Emi]

emi, your baby is adorable.

Thanks, I truly appreciate

 

[krkrjx]

I hope they have more than just DNA. It will be the most boring trial in history if that's it in its entirety.

I wonder if there is video from a neighbor's home showing his vehicle cruising the streets near her home at the time she would have been leaving for school. There were stills from a video made public right before he was arrested of his vehicle in motion where LE were asking for anyone to give information on the vehicle; I wonder where and when that video was shot.

 

[essjay]

I hope they have more than just DNA. It will be the most boring trial in history if that's it in its entirety.

I wonder if there is video from a neighbor's home showing his vehicle cruising the streets near her home at the time she would have been leaving for school. There were stills from a video made public right before he was arrested of his vehicle in motion where LE were asking for anyone to give information on the vehicle; I wonder where and when that video was shot.

Yes! I remember this as well. Let me gripe again about this not being broadcasted in any way 😒 I really want to see videos and photographs of incriminating evidence we haven't seen yet, or have only caught a glimpse of.

 

[Emi]

I won't be,able to post tomorrow morning, cause will be in a baby and me class

 

[Migmuu]

Don't be surprised if he is convicted of the 3 charges of attempted kidnap ping or even lesser charges. But I still have my doubts about him being convicted of Sierra .
Living here and hearing things from the day it happened till now. And with the Bombshell of some of the DNA evidence now not being solid like the DA lead us all to believe. Makes me wonder. Along with the fact I said this from day 1 he does not seem smart enough to hide a body this well .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There is plenty of space just within a 20-mile radius of Morgan Hill where a body could easily be hidden and potentially not found for decades. Garcia-Torres was reportedly an outdoorsy person and could very well have known several places to hide Sierra's body.