I'm with you in that it would not be right, nor just, to convict a person without evidence. I don't know if my "top 5" pieces of "evidence" would be sufficient to overcome the reasonable doubt. Her behavior is certainly suspicious, and if they can prove the affair beyond a doubt she can be convicted on the perjury charge.
1. Her denials - or twisting of facts - regarding the alleged affair. As I stated earlier, even if it didn't happen, why the hostility and the barbed comments to the prosecutor who is trying to put away her husband's killer? It appears that by this behavior she is trying to stick her finger in the dam after the fact because she knows more and is digging in her heels to save herself.
2. Her alibis about the shooting, discrepancies about what she told her friend (or vice versa) regarding Hemy as a suspect, and other things she argued about on the stand don't stand up to scrutiny. The amount of discrepancies are overwhelmingly against her and the fact that she placed all of the blame on Hemy rather than taking ANY responsibility for her own actions in the relationship are troubling to me. The testimony of Shayna Citron stating that she really felt they were having an affair; Andrea's amazingly arrogant actions in the courtroom, threatening Citron and trying to get into the witness room, etc.
3. The fact that both prosecution and defense placed her squarely in the middle as either the manipulator or co-conspirator is highly unusual and seems to indicate there was and is strong evidence (some of which we may yet not know) to convict her.
4. The fact that Hemy had such detailed information about her home and Rusty's routine DOWN TO THE MINUTE he would be taking a child to day care, for instance, I find to be unusual. Even in a "close" co-worker relationship I have a problem that much information being shared about family members. Her sending hundreds of pictures of her children to him, complaining to him about Rusty's so-called neglect of the children. This seems to indicate that she was setting up a situation to have him help her perhaps change her situation.
5. Her behavior in the emergency room, bizarre by the accounts of the witnesses, and by any standard. Similar behavior from Conrad Murray, convicted of the killing of Michael Jackson, led to his conviction.
6. The fact that she withheld information from the police about her alleged "suspicions" that HN could be the killer. Her explanation of that was ridiculous. ALL of her explanations about any evidence that shows her involvement with Neuman in any way - her arrogant and adamnant denials - shows me she is hiding things.
7. A person who was not guilty and not involved would not go to the extremes she has to cover things up.
8. I.e., having Hemy get her computer for her and DELETING. IDK if there will be testimony from Steve Sneiderman about how Andrea and her mother and brother tried to prevent the police from searching the house?
These items (and I could think of more) do not qualify as forensic evidence. But we know that circumstantial evidence is, after all, evidence. If she was not involved, I would hope the defense can provide EVIDENCE to the contrary, although they are not obliged to do so. For her sake, I think they should try, though.
MOO
Thanks so much for your insights.
