seagull65
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 2,667
- Reaction score
- 0
She did confess to killing him, herself, without help.
it's interesting though how people will say that a suspect is clearly a compulsive liar, you can't believe a word they say, they have changed their story over and over, and their behavior has been seen to be bizarre, I.e. they were doing headstands at the police station, singing to themselves in front of other people, etc, yet when they are finally convinced to confess after being told repeatedly that evidence exists that proves they are the one who did it and that no one else could possibly have done it (even if the evidence isn't actually conclusive), and even with ample indicators that they are probably not a very stable person, everyone accepts their confession as the gospel truth. lol. I guess this is a long way of saying, false confessions do sometimes occur, it's a well-known phenomenon. Can we believe her confession any more than her other stories, and which one is more clearly supported by the evidence? Whether her confession was false or not I don't know, she told various stories and her confession was one of them. Even in her confession she could only come up with memories of firing a gun in self defense and hearing the sound of a knife hitting the floor (by then she'd given up the part of the story about two other people having been there, and by this time she'd heard elements of the crime scene described over and over and over.) The memories she described reminded me of the way people sometimes describe their memories after an incident where they were drugged, i.e. a few flashes. Or of the memories sometimes elicited thru hypnosis therapy (we all know about the potential for false memory development.) Now I'm not claiming she necessarily didn't do it or anything like that, though. For me it was about 50/50, not very conclusive forensic evidence linking her but the defense didn't challenge it, investigation too limited and focused solely on JA due to fingerpointing , no evidence of motive, no history of violent or criminal behavior, no interest in weapons or past history that would have prepared her to use a knife in this manner i.e. no hunting or knowledge/experience with guns/knives, question of could she have inflicted these injuries without him stopping her and without her being seriously injured, do injuries look like one attacker or two, fact of why would she have allowed herself to be photographed plus left the camera there, plus is her confession reliable, and I thought the case rested mostly on the confession. Yet, she did confess and her defense did put on the whole self-defense plus "snapped" PTSD defense, and that could have been true for all I know. I was very surprised the jury came back with premeditated. My opinion only.