CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #23 *ARREST*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Live presser coming on Facebook.

“Follow this thread! We've learned another press conference after hearing, arrest papers still sealed, and Frazee's attorney wants to push off the prelim hearing, says he isn't read to present penitentiary support. @AshleyKKTV about to stream live presser on @KKTV11News facebook”

Spencer Wilson on Twitter
Thank you!

"penitentiary support?" Er, what?! :confused:
 
I generally post to both threads at the same time, but it is too much to carry everyone else's tweets over there as well as my own when the thread is moving fast. I tried it the other day and it was impossible! MOO

ETA: Thank you, @oviedo - I see you are posting to the media thread. ;)

Thank you so much for all you do (and all the other wonderful posters who consistently post all of the media stories)! It is very much appreciated!
 
Well. I don’t think “many people” believed in CW’s innocence. You’ll have to point them out because on here, everyone is quick to say “I know CW was guilty from the jump”. They’ve said it in this thread (well, the one that just closed).

Back to Mary Winkler - you say “Deep South border state” like it explains that sentence. It doesn’t. Alabama is very male-dominated. You had a man - a pastor - who was shot in the back. And the wife left him where he lay - alive - and took her kids on a beach trip. If the gun accidentally went off, you call 911. You don’t go on a trip. The defense said that he made her wear high heels and a wig sometimes; when they displayed those items, the jury actually GASPED. Really? I’ll never understand that verdict or why voluntary manslaughter was even an option.

Voluntary manslaughter is a viable lesser included charge of homicide. The law allows the jury to find a defendant guilty of a lesser included charge of first degree murder when they find that the elements of the lesser included crime have been proven but not all the additional elements of first degree murder. Like premeditation.

The jury apparently felt the state didn't prove premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt. So voluntary manslaughter was an alternative they felt they could go with.

It carried a sentencing range of 3-15 years. Your statement that the jury gasped when presented with a wig and high heels proves my point. Like I essentially said, they were horrified by the thought of anything other than Puritan sex and found her actions mitigated as a result and gave her the least time possible. Pretty shocking.

(It was Tennessee by the way. Not Alabama).

Regardless, it's not comparable to this case. As I have detailed previously.

As to the CW case, no. I'm not going to have to point out what posters. Believe what you want. The threads are still there. It was a significant minority and the threads are full of almost nothing but our debates. IMO some people hated the victim, thus they bent over backward to ignore logic in order to find a way CW could be innocent.

But we are getting far afield. The original issue was your post criticizing people for having the opinion that this guy is likely guilty.

I think some who are critical of that opinion simply have a grave distrust of the authorities for various reasons.

Regardless, it's early on. It's reasonable to be unconvinced of his guilt at this stage.

But it's also quite reasonable to be of the opinion that the CBI and FBI and the DA got it right.

And it is unreasonable, IMO, under the circumstances, to chastise people for arriving at that opinion, as wanting to railroad an innocent man and declare him guilty until proven innocent.

That's just not what any of this is about. Most of us respect our constitutional protections and the safeguards against tyranny that those protections afford.
 
Thank you so much for all you do (and all the other wonderful posters who consistently post all of the media stories)! It is very much appreciated!

Seriously!!

And Pommy diligently puts all the media articles in the media thread to so people can catch up without having to wade through so many threads. It's super considerate.
 
Since he's only been charged but not convicted, is it not appropriate that he be able to wear normal (dress) attire while in court? I guess that would be up to his public defender? Perhaps it's reserved to court moments when a jury is present.

Yes. That's exactly right. He will be able to wear regular clothes once trial commences. His counsel will file a motion to ensure that if it hasn't happened already.
 
State Prosecutor in today's PC after court responded to a question by a reporter on whether or not they felt that LE had arrested PF too early, she replied "Confident PF was not arrested too early".

ETA: More clarification
 
Last edited:
Yes. That's exactly right. He will be able to wear regular clothes once trial commences. His counsel will file a motion to ensure that if it hasn't happened already.
I wonder if that will include a cowboy hat, boots, and suspenders.

He doesn’t strike me as the suit wearing type.
 
Presser underway:

Sam Kraemer on Twitter

Viehman says any of that testing will be worked out with the defense. #KelseyBerreth #PatrickFrazee @KOAA

So he now has the arrest affidavit for all who were concerned. The state agreed. I don't think they ever would've won the motion to keep it sealed from the defendant.

I wonder if that does indicate there's been another arrest.

This is going to be an interesting case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
119
Guests online
3,056
Total visitors
3,175

Forum statistics

Threads
602,695
Messages
18,145,447
Members
231,496
Latest member
endoplazmikretikulum95
Back
Top