I agree family annihilation do exists and some kill, I'm not arguing that fact.
All I'm saying is my perception of CW doesn't fit with a family annihilation at this time. I don't believe CW thought his family let him down, or that he's anti-social with rage, anger management and resentment issues. There was no known acts of domestic violence patterns and I don't think CW acted out with revenge. jmo
Good thinking of possible strategy. I just don't think they have much they can come up with that will hold water. I do not personally find the answers credible, nor do I believe that reasonable jurors will, either, based on the evidence we know right now. But we shall see! Particularly if they say it was to protect the wife's reputation (so concerned for her he denied her and her family a proper burial, etc) and that he was forced to kill her (um, no...who made him judge and jury?). Rage + trauma + carefully executed (if flawed) plan to cover it all up = doesn't add up. The only thing that does add up, IMO, is he did it. So far the State agrees. But it will be interesting to see the defense.I could answer (kind of) all of those.
How many 'reasonable' loving fathers see something like he described (made up).
After they are killed... he couldn't save them and searched his mind for a way to hide the bodies so the public would not learn of what his wife did (made up)
Had to call/txt her phone to look like she had just left with the kids, not killed them forcing him to kill her (made up).
I know not feasible, likely or reasonable... but they are semi-answers.
I tend to think the conversation with his father was recorded. I think back to Jodi Arias's father and mother in the police station, and also Ross Harris's wife in the police station. Both of them were before they were arrested.
I understand but I do not personally find them credible, nor do I believe that reasonable jurors will, either, based on the evidence we know right now. But we shall see! Particularly if they say it was to protect the wife's reputation (so concerned for her he denied her and her family a proper burial, etc) and that he was forced to kill her (um, no...who made him judge and jury?). Rage + trauma + carefully executed (if flawed) plan to cover it all up = doesn't add up. The only thing that does add up, IMO, is he did it. So far the State agrees. But it will be interesting to see the defense.
It is hard to imagine that a person who vould kill his family had no signs. For instance, Ted Bundy tried to drown his fiancee. At the time, she was uncomfortable about it but dismissed it as a joke. When it came out who he really was, the drowning took on a new meaning.
It is easy... someone gone crazy does crazy things.Yeah it's going to be interesting to see how they show a guy became so enraged by his wife's murder of their kids that he killed her but second later was suddenly protective of her reputation.
I like your post. I like to believe that if I had children, I would believe like you. I hope CW's parents and his family are there for him, not exactly defending him (how could they?) but rather, just loving him as their son. Whatever happened that night or morning is not defensible, IMO, even if what CW claims happened is true. Still, murder is murder. In addition to four lives ended, two sides of extended family have been shattered.Jumping off your post here.... I have 2 sons. Both right around CW's age. Both have 3 precious babies. I have always told my children since the day they were born, there is nothing they could do to make me stop loving them. Heaven forbid if either of my sons were ever in the position of CW, I would love them (all the while not understanding their actions) & I would encourage (especially if I thought there was a chance they weren't being 100% truthful), maybe even DEMAND they own what they did no matter the outcome. I always tried to teach my children they had to be accountable for their actions & take the consequences as a result.... but as you said Madison, I would definitely NOT go about publicly or privately defending them.
All MOO
Yeah it's going to be interesting to see how they show a guy became so enraged by his wife's murder of their kids that he killed her but second later was suddenly protective of her reputation.
Agreed, sadly. But I do not think that is the norm.Well, you could look at the C.Anthony case to see that jurors can find reasonable things unreasonable and vice versa.
If not... we should still be looking for the real killer of Caley and maybe help with the finding Nicole and Ron's killer(s?) too.
It is easy... someone gone crazy does crazy things.
They don't think too 'regular' either.
I would imagine it is all the more difficult when it is immediately followed by spectacularly sane, diabolical, felonious behavior to cover up said temporary insanity.Oh that's not easy at all. Proving temporary insanity is one of the hardest things to do in terms of a defense.
I would imagine it is all the more difficult when it is immediately followed by spectacularly sane, diabolical, felonious behavior to cover up said temporary insanity.
I believe that he was going to move SW to a more secretive hiding place and I think that he thought putting the girls in oil, that no one would ever think of that.But it wasn't sane or diabolical... he took the bodies to the ONLY place he could. He couldn't deviate from his way to work because of GPS.
Then: Where is the 1st place LE will look after you are suspected of the crime---- where you went.
Nothing spectacular about what he did... more like pathetic.
Maybe later... but I think his first idea was to put all three in the tanks.I believe that he was going to move SW to a more secretive hiding place and I think that he thought putting the girls in oil, that no one would ever think of that.