GUILTY Fl - Diane Ward, 55, Murdered In Her Orlando Home, 21 Sept 2009

[ohiogirl]

This is a tough one for me to surmise what the jury will think. If the 18" is correct, that's pretty far for both of them to be holding on to the gun. His outbursts, I am sure, didn't go over well. Was he signalling for his daughter to break down? I don't think so, but who knows?
If it was me, and an accident, I would have wanted the jury to hear my side.
Again, could he not keep his temper?
All the videos shown of him made him seem like a happy go lucky, carefree guy, imo.
And, what effect does the fiasco of the CA jury have on this jury? Hopefully, nothing, but, time will tell.
Interesting case. jmo

 

[Cortne]

Why didnt he get angry after the so called accidental shooting?

Gets pissy when money is bought up or daughter cries in court, but not when his wife is on the floor dead by his own hand? Yeah, not so much. Evil hatred there IMO.

 

[joe jones]

jury have requested to see the gun to fire the trigger, judge granted it, (without bullets in obviously)

 

[ohiogirl]

huh! interesting

 

[joe jones]

now jury want a yard stick, I presume to measure how far away the gun was fired from if they believe the ME testimony

 

[UdbCrzy2]

They asked the judge if they could see the gun that killed Diane Ward. They want to see how easy or difficult it will be to pull the trigger.

http://www.wesh.com/r/29276105/detail.html

 

[lonetraveler]

now jury want a yard stick, I presume to measure how far away the gun was fired from if they believe the ME testimony

I hope they consider the length of the hand holding it and the (impossible, IMO) bend of the elbow and wrist to accomplish a self-inflicted shot to the face.

 

[joe jones]

the jury appears to be questioning the evidence and doing what they swore to do, to look at the evidence and only the evidence without emotion, and then decide beyond a reasonable doubt guilt or innocence,

 

[lonetraveler]

the jury appears to be questioning the evidence and doing what they swore to do, to look at the evidence and only the evidence without emotion, and then decide beyond a reasonable doubt guilt or innocence,

Yes it does appear that this jury is actually deliberating. Refreshing. I'm glad that they are asking the questions that they are asking.

 

[Cortne]

Which way will they go?

My gut tells me hes walkin'. Man ol man. May justice be served.

What happens if he walks? I have no faith anymore. Thankfully they are looking at the evidence.

Verdict soon Im betting.

 

[lonetraveler]

Which way will they go?

My gut tells me hes walkin'. Man ol man. May justice be served.

What happens if he walks? I have no faith anymore. Thankfully they are looking at the evidence.

Verdict soon Im betting.

I think he killed her but I also have the nagging feeling that you are right, that the jury is struggling with that "Reasonable Doubt" thing.

 

[Cortne]

I think he killed her but I also have the nagging feeling that you are right, that the jury is struggling with that "Reasonable Doubt" thing.

Crap. I wanna be wrong.

 

[joe jones]

jury not allowed yardstick,

 

[UdbCrzy2]

It worries me about them wanting to have the gun to test for ease of trigger pull. I didn't think that they could 'test' evidence. If they did, I hope it does not come up later on appeal because of it.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

IMO the vote is split on second degree murder, and now it comes down to who can convince the other side to change their vote. Based on what they have asked for,.they are debating if she could have pulled the trigger from the distance the ME gave.

I didn't watch the trial but did the defense have their own ME give a less distance?

MOO

 

[joe jones]

IMO the vote is split on second degree murder, and now it comes down to who can convince the other side to change their vote. Based on what they have asked for,.they are debating if she could have pulled the trigger from the distance the ME gave.

I didn't watch the trial but did the defense have their own ME give a less distance?

MOO

yes, if I recall state said about 18 inches, and defence expert said 6-12, so they vary in as much as states theory of distance would make it nearly impossible for her to have done it, and defences range means she could have easily done it

 

[joe jones]

It worries me about them wanting to have the gun to test for ease of trigger pull. I didn't think that they could 'test' evidence. If they did, I hope it does not come up later on appeal because of it.

the ease of trigger pull leads me to think that some are tending towards the struggle theory, where he was trying to prevent her from shooting herself and the gun went off

one or more jurors may wish to see how little pressure or how hard you need to squeeze in order for the gun to go off, to see if the struggle theory works,

I thought jurors were not allowed to do experiments, wasn't there such a furore over the Peterson jurors who messed with the boat, or the jurors in another trial who did some tests on how quickly a body dries when they were deliberating in a trial to see if they felt the wife drowned or the husband murdered her, defendant got an appeal in this case

 

[HatesSociopaths]

yes, if I recall state said about 18 inches, and defence expert said 6-12, so they vary in as much as states theory of distance would make it nearly impossible for her to have done it, and defences range means she could have easily done it

I think I will brace myself for another not guilty verdict.

Where has common sense gone in that county?

:banghead:

 

[Duke Fan4]

Well if I was on this jury. I'd have to go with the 911 call. JMOO

 

[joe jones]

I think I will brace myself for another not guilty verdict.

Where has common sense gone in that county?

:banghead:

I think part of it is that reasonable doubt is a concept that does not fully get explained to jury so they struggle with that, also charges when written down are often very complex and difficult to reconcile with 12 people remembering different things which meet the elements of a long complex charging document,

I also think the jury instructions just confuddle and confuse most people, I have watched trials where they may as well have been speaking in Latin so confused and convoluted were the jury instructions

if they just kept it simple then I think most jurors would be able to look at the evidence, decide who and what they choose to believe and then render a verdict

too often jurors after rendering a verdict reveal that they discussed things such as the demeanour of the defendant in court, the defendants choice to not testify, and many other things which a judge has instructed them to pay no heed to