CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #65

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Diddian said:
Personally, I think some of this memory stuff is fascinating - the things that can impact memory or change memory or introduce inaccurate memory.

But, I don't think it belongs in a courtroom as expert scientific testimony any more than the testimony of a psychic would.

Unless addressing specific issues or incidents in a particular case (ETA: that the introduction of THIS by LE or by FD impacted MT's memory of THAT), the boundaries around it are simply too soft and permeable. (ETA: the jury cannot apply the broad generalities presented to the specifics of THIS case and apply reason.)
Click to expand...
I agree. What are her specifics as to THis case?
 
afitzy said:
L&C - Facinating to see how ANGRY the chat is about Judge not intervening with Jon Schoenhorn absolute disrespect to Gloria Farber yesterday - Chat moving so fast that its impossible now to read:
"For him to say unhinged is total BS and he knows it"
"Bad memory and trying to get away with murder. Two things, very different".
"Judge wasn't too concerned about the need to show respect when Horn was cross examining the murdered woman's 88 yr old mother, Gloria!"
"weeks and weeks of horn being disrespectful and annoying. now McGuiness says one thing a bit over the top and papa judge calls a meeting lol"
"You notice how she came alive and she perked up when talking about the sociopathic murderers? She remembers a lot about those testimonies .. she's enamored!!!"
"Hutch is watching golden girl reruns on a mini tv next to his pond while he skips stones and drinks a soda pop"
"Hope SNL writers are in this chat"
Click to expand...
^the bit about being enamored

here is a quote from that hit piece article I linked.
www.newyorker.com

How Elizabeth Loftus Changed the Meaning of Memory

The psychologist taught us that what we remember is not fixed, but her work testifying for defendants like Harvey Weinstein collides with our traumatized moment.
www.newyorker.com www.newyorker.com
Every week, Loftus receives letters from prisoners, and she (or her research assistant) always responds. “We empathize with you,” she recently wrote to a man convicted of murdering another inmate while in federal prison. “We wish you the best and welcome updates,” she wrote to a man convicted of shooting someone multiple times. “I received your letter and request for information on ‘my theory,’ ” she wrote to Jerry Sandusky, who in 2012 was convicted of sexually abusing children while a football coach at Penn State. “It must be terribly difficult for you and your family, and I hope you have the legal help needed to resolve your situation justly.”
Click to expand...
 
waldojabba said:
I have a pretty significant background in psychology but do not practice. All the studies etc are not new but yes interesting. In order to apply any of it to this case we would need to bypass generalities and even then it’s not black and white. Just because X happens in a certain percent of people does not mean it applies to Michelle or you or me.
just a long way of me saying, she really has no relevance here.
JMO
Click to expand...
So agree. Its disappointing in a way as Dr Loftus could have been positioned to offer an interesting perspective had she done more work on the case imo. To not even detail what she did to prepare etc. and then launch into a version of one of her regular canned speeches is simply leaving me cold here. Memory is a facinating topic and even though seeing well educated 'experts' weaponised to discredit witnesses or VICTIMS in Court is something I find highly troubling, I wanted to hear more from Dr Loftus ON MT! She didn't deliver this imo and I'm disappointed. MOO
 
Last edited:
Diddian said:
Yes, exactly. If I am a juror, having listened and observed over the course of several weeks and beginning to develop opinions about the reliability of THIS defendant's spoken words and the motivations involved given the totality of all I have yet been introduced to... there is very little of Dr. Loftus' testimony that I can make use of. It seems to me that the broad generalities she offers about memory are likely generalities that most individual jurors have already incorporated into their own understanding of memory from those sources they have encountered in everyday life.

ETA: There is nothing SPECIFIC or PARTICULAR with regard to this case. It's like a sideshow.
Click to expand...
Rbbm

More like a side... salad.
 
Curious-A said:
Imo Judge R seems like he was tip toeing around JS’s treatment of state’s witnesses and blatant disrespect for the court/judge on many occasions AND antics from MT and MT’s mother etc but a couple of remarks from state that were a bit snarky and the court abruptly goes into a recess… hmmm. Something is amiss…
Click to expand...
Maybe the state doesn't want anyone to know its prosecutors are underpaid? Remember how Colangelo got fired for trying to get raises for himself and other states attorneys--by hiring Diamantis' daughter at hefty salary?
 
Honestly, since the very beginning of this trial I had commented on the lack of Passion from McG or Manning. They both came across as captains of a ship on a long voyage. Calm seas, and steady as she goes....

Today, I actually see a little 'pirate' in McG. And, I liked it.

MOO ( and Arghhh )
 
Honestly, if Chauncy Gardiner showed up and sat in the witness chair and testified, "As long as the roots are not severed, all is well and all will be well in the garden," it'd be little different in terms of relevance.

Yes, but was he talking about THIS or talking about THAT?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 110 more.
Total: 3,196 (members: 111, guests: 3,085)

Online statistics

Members online
111
Guests online
3,085
Total visitors
3,196
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,656
Messages
18,144,507
Members
231,472
Latest member
Momo1
Back
Top