GUILTY GA - Rusty Sneiderman shot to death at Dunwoody preschool, 18 Nov 2010 #5

[MeeBee]

I have also read that the Sneiderman's have filed to have the insurance money placed in a trust fund for the kids so that no one else can ever touch it. And there is a wrongful death suit against Andrea and Hemy.

BTW, can they do that if she hasn't been convicted of murder yet?

 

[tezi]

I believe there was proof that OJ killed his wife and the jury ignored it. Much proof.

In CA's case, I can see why the jury found her not guilty. I believe she had something to do with Caylee's death but I don't know exactly what that was. I believe that she was guilty of lying and I believe she was guilty of neglect. I believe that something she did lead to Caylee's death but I don't think the State had enough to go as hard as they did and in turn lost that case. I think the best they had was manslaughter. So in that case as much as it is not possible I can see why the jury voted how they did.

I think that to convict on murder you have to show the proof of the murder. And in this case , I can see the case for lying, But as to how some people connect that to murder? I don't see it. I don't see proof of that.

In Simpson's case, the case was lost because of the two lead prosecutors. They could have chose to rehabilitate Mark Fuhrman, and the case wouldn't have been lost. They could have also charged him with 2nd degree murder, and they would have won.

CA was overcharged. The state was too confident. She was guilty of child neglect resulting in death.

You also don't see proof of an affair, which is plain as day. You pick and choose which words of Hemy's to believe, but believe the convicted liar AS. You can't have it both ways. AS is not a victim of anyone but her own manipulative self. She manipulated HN into doing what he did, and then took up with another married man with a pregnant wife. And yet, you put AS up for "victim of the century." I just don't get it.

JMO

 

[kantoo]

I have also read that the Sneiderman's have filed to have the insurance money placed in a trust fund for the kids so that no one else can ever touch it. And there is a wrongful death suit against Andrea and Hemy.

BTW, can they do that if she hasn't been convicted of murder yet?

bbm

yes they can do it

 

[kantoo]

wrongful death suit

The taking of the life of an individual resulting from the willful or negligent act of another person or persons.

A wrongful death action is separate and apart from criminal charges, and neither proceeding affects nor controls the other.

In order to sue for wrongful death, it must be proven that the acts or omissions of the defendant were the proximate cause of the decedent's injuries and death. This means that the defendant's wrongful conduct must have created a natural, direct series of events that led to the injury.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Wrongful+death+claim

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Do you not see your bias here? Your friends are pointing it out but you are not looking at it. Why?

You said a sexual relationship is Inferred!!!! But proof exists more in this case than the ones I referred above that you feel more strongly about. AS case has witnesses seeing them romantic, proof exists SHE changed arrangements on setting up adjoining rooms when Hemy came and he wasn't even on business in Colorado, her words of shaming her family, statements they made to friends.

That is not inferred as much as you want to make it to be. There is direct and indirect proof. We aren't talking about murder. We are talking about a sexual relationship. Anyway you define what a sexual relationship is, they had it!

I don't have any biases here. I am just reasoning my way through.
Romantic is what it is. I am not taking the leap and saying they had sex because I don't know. No one knows but them. I know a lot of people who are close and don't do the deed. I don't think it matters either. There was some relationship.
I would feel shame if i went away and had some kind of fling with a guy even if I did not have sex. If I just stayed with him, Slept in the bed, I would feel shame.

I frankly don't care what they did in the room. You think they had sex. I am not sure what they did and don't think it really matters.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

<modsnip> From seeing no evidence of an affair, to seeing evidence of something but not sex, to hey maybe they had a little something but that doesn't mean she was complicit in the murder. I don't know why you keep bringing up the fact that no one has convinced you of her complicity because no one has tried. That's not what this trial is about. And none of us can say as confidently as we can that she lied about her affair with Hemy that she was complicit in the murder. Even Rusty's friend was on this board and was worried that the state wouldn't be able to prove the murder charges even if he thought she was in on it. They dropped the charges a few days later. There's a difference between having a hunch about something and having the evidence. You may believe something but not be able to prove it. Cops have to release perps allt the time because they just don't have the evidence, even if it is likely they are guilty of one thing or another. The state only gets one shot at her. I'm sure they want to make sure they do it right the first and only time.

But whether they had actual intercourse is kind of not relevant. And no, we aren't going to get video of it, so there will never be "proof." But if they engaged in any kind of intimate relationship (and even if they did everything but) and she lied about any of it that is still perjury and making false statements. She was also convicted of hindering an investigation when she deleted the calls and texts from Hemy, fwiw.

And frankly, so far, there is much more evidence that something more than Hemy kissed Andrea and she just felt so ashamed of it went on.

That is called progress..

As I look at things slowly and clearly it will affect how I think about the case. So I started not really believing much went on but then people here were good enough to point me towards evidence that changed my mind and help me see a clearly view of the relationship.

AS far as discussing the murder, many people in this thread have mentioned their belief or their disbelief that she had something to do with the murder. Since it was part of the original charges and even though it was dismissed, I think it is still part of the conversation. Some believe through this verdict they will be able to refile the murder charges finding more evidence, SO I don't think it is out of the parameters of the discussion here.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

OK, so yesterday, Hemy's words didn't mean anything, but today they do? Just color me confused.

BTW, I think they have some sort of proof that she was involved in the murder, just not enough proof to feel secure in getting a conviction, yet.

I think that after Hemy's appeal is denied, that AS will be facing charges for murder, because I think HN will spill the beans, and not only will AS be a convicted liar, she'll also be a convicted murderer.

As always, JMO.

Well frankly his words still don't mean anything to me, But others here have been kind enough to point me to other evidence that to me shows me that there was some kind of relationship.

Here is the thing, I know that the majority of people here think she is guilt of this and a lot more. One way to get others to see your point is not to gang up on people but let them find their way with a pointing to the evidence and letting them work it out for themselves. People should not feel they have to think as everyone else to be allowed to post their feelings. That would be BORING!!

Some of us are slower to want to put a guilty on someone. Let us take our time and work it out.. If it is there, we will get there..

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Scarlett, I am glad you are here and appreciate your healthy dose of skepticism. It's always good to question and I like how you stick to your guns rather than going with the crowd.
The difference here, is that we all got our information from the trial as it was progressing, along with many outside sources that were linked to we readers. It's not really up to us to change your mind. That should come from YOU watching the evidence that was presented during the trial.
For you to come in after it is all over, without watching the entire trial - and second guessing our opinions is sorta .......disrespectful.
I wish you would watch the entire trial and maybe read some of the links readers provided here on this thread. I think your arguments would hold more weight, and be more respected.
Keep on keeping on, friend. You are an asset to WS.

 

[katiedid2]

It is really sad and unnecessary that Andrea and her parents have fought to keep Rusty's parents away from the kids. How and why did all of that start? Did it start when Don and Steven starting having their doubts about Andrea? What a great way for her to solidify their doubts... withhold the kids. Ugh.

She could have easily sat down with them, listened to their concerns, given them the truth, and then assured them that they would always have a relationship with the kids. Just another example of her absolute defiance.

Totaly agree with you. I did not realize how much narsisism there was in Andreas family. Listening to shayna citrons atty on hln after dark last night! Shayna said that the day after the murder, she was at Andreas house with andrea and Andreas dad! And Andreas dad said " we are going to throw them to the wolves"
Meaning the cops or detectives coming to question andrea. The apple doesn't fall to far from the tree. So sad that three marriage were affected were destroyed by Andreas selfishness.
Andreas husband murdered, hemi's wife cheated on. As well as dell and his wife.
I truly am beginning to think that andreas dad coached her! To save face and fear of loosing his daughter, and save face with their other family and friends.
The sniedermans lost their son and two grandchildren, not their fault, because andrea punished them for her own actions. I. Pray they get to see their grandkids. Andreas dad stated that he loved rusty like a son! Yet he lets dell move in with them. Wasnt she supposedly in grief stricken mode. Sorry. If I don't make sense but this realy bothered me.

 

[Roy23]

Scarlett, I am glad you are here and appreciate your healthy dose of skepticism. It's always good to question and I like how you stick to your guns rather than going with the crowd.
The difference here, is that we all got our information from the trial as it was progressing, along with many outside sources that were linked to we readers. It's not really up to us to change your mind. That should come from YOU watching the evidence that was presented during the trial.
For you to come in after it is all over, without watching the entire trial - and second guessing our opinions is sorta .......disrespectful.
I wish you would watch the entire trial and maybe read some of the links readers provided here on this thread. I think your arguments would hold more weight, and be more respected.
Keep on keeping on, friend. You are an asset to WS.

That is about as well said and honest post as i have ever read here. Kudos!

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Scarlett, I am glad you are here and appreciate your healthy dose of skepticism. It's always good to question and I like how you stick to your guns rather than going with the crowd.
The difference here, is that we all got our information from the trial as it was progressing, along with many outside sources that were linked to we readers. It's not really up to us to change your mind. That should come from YOU watching the evidence that was presented during the trial.
For you to come in after it is all over, without watching the entire trial - and second guessing our opinions is sorta .......disrespectful.
I wish you would watch the entire trial and maybe read some of the links readers provided here on this thread. I think your arguments would hold more weight, and be more respected.
Keep on keeping on, friend. You are an asset to WS.

I agree. But sadly that is not always possible. I am trial watcher and try to watch most of them but life sometimes gets in the way and so many of us can not keep up like we would like to.

Im not second guessing you. I respect everyone's opinions.. When I say I don't see it, That is all I am saying, not that you should not either.

I appreciate your thoughts and I apologize if I am coming across as someone judging your opinions of the trial. I am not. I value all the members here and their views.

For this trial, I was expecting a murder trial and when that was dropped, it almost felt to me that the state just wanted to get her on something.

I come here because some of the smartest sleuthers are here. I know I will get information.

 

[MeeBee]

Scarlett, I am glad you are here and appreciate your healthy dose of skepticism. It's always good to question and I like how you stick to your guns rather than going with the crowd.
The difference here, is that we all got our information from the trial as it was progressing, along with many outside sources that were linked to we readers. It's not really up to us to change your mind. That should come from YOU watching the evidence that was presented during the trial.
For you to come in after it is all over, without watching the entire trial - and second guessing our opinions is sorta .......disrespectful.
I wish you would watch the entire trial and maybe read some of the links readers provided here on this thread. I think your arguments would hold more weight, and be more respected.
Keep on keeping on, friend. You are an asset to WS.

Right. I do appreciate your opinions Scarlett, everyone's entitled to them. But I think what bothers is that you came in and basically said everyone felt the way the feel based on emotion alone and is not basing any of their opinions on facts. You couldn't understand why everyone hated a woman when you yourself did not have all the facts. Just because someone looked at the evidence/facts and came to a different conclusion than you, does not mean they are being irrationally emotional and hateful. And it doesn't mean people are just following the crowd and can't think for themselves. I came into this trial not knowing much at all and did not even see the Hemy Neuman trial when it happened. When I caught up to everything it was pretty plain to me why she was being charged and why there were murder charges brought in the first place.

<modsnip>

But I respect your opinions and your skeptical mind. It's a good thing to be.

 

[tezi]

Well frankly his words still don't mean anything to me, But others here have been kind enough to point me to other evidence that to me shows me that there was some kind of relationship.

Here is the thing, I know that the majority of people here think she is guilt of this and a lot more. One way to get others to see your point is not to gang up on people but let them find their way with a pointing to the evidence and letting them work it out for themselves. People should not feel they have to think as everyone else to be allowed to post their feelings. That would be BORING!!

Some of us are slower to want to put a guilty on someone. Let us take our time and work it out.. If it is there, we will get there..

I am not ganging up on you. You have openly posted how you feel, and I have done the same.

Here's the thing. I have been here for 13 years, and I have never been reprimanded by another poster about my opinion while following a trial. In the trial that shall not be named, I gave up trying to post my opinion because of all of the reminders that were posted. I decided that I am not going to back down from my opinion about AS. And guess, what? My opinion of her being a liar is now a fact supported by a jury of her peers.

Now, with that said, I am not responding to anymore posts that I find disingenuous. IMO, it is disingenuous to say that there is no proof of an affair. Because if you knew the contents of the eMails, or watched the testimony about said eMails, there is no way you would say that.

As always, JMO. And I don't need to be reminded about the mods. I don't intend to make their job any harder than it already is.

 

[katiedid2]

In Simpson's case, the case was lost because of the two lead prosecutors. They could have chose to rehabilitate Mark Fuhrman, and the case wouldn't have been lost. They could have also charged him with 2nd degree murder, and they would have won.

CA was overcharged. The state was too confident. She was guilty of child neglect resulting in death.

You also don't see proof of an affair, which is plain as day. You pick and choose which words of Hemy's to believe, but believe the convicted liar AS. You can't have it both ways. AS is not a victim of anyone but her own manipulative self. She manipulated HN into doing what he did, and then took up with another married man with a pregnant wife. And yet, you put AS up for "victim of the century." I just don't get it.

JMO

O/t
To bad Cindy Anthony was not charged with the same crime as andrea! Behind all her lies.

 

[tezi]

O/t
To bad Cindy Anthony was not charged with the same crime as andrea! Behind all her lies.

Yep, that would have been a slam dunk.

ETA: You should have warned me about that post you made. I now have Coca-Cola all over my desk. Because I thought that same exact thing yesterday....LOL

JMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Oh I understand why people hate her.. She does not lend herself to likability. She is much of a shrew.

I think that people all come to their own conclusions and that even if they agree in the aggregate they may not agree on the little details. I think that is what is at odds here, the little details. Just because I don't think or am not ready to believe they had sex, That is just where I am coming from. That is no judgment on those who may believe it is true. Just my opinion on it.

I think that is your summation and not mine. That is why there are 12 on a jury. To collectively look at the crime the evidence and find for guilt. Even then people may disagree on the details. Look at the guilt phase of the arias trial. All felt she was guilty, Some thought she was guilty of felony murder and some premeditated and felony murder. But they all believed she murdered him.
That is all this is too.

 

[MeeBee]

Oh I understand why people hate her.. She does not lend herself to likability. She is much of a shrew.

I think that people all come to their own conclusions and that even if they agree in the aggregate they may not agree on the little details. I think that is what is at odds here, the little details. Just because I don't think or am not ready to believe they had sex, That is just where I am coming from. That is no judgment on those who may believe it is true. Just my opinion on it.

I think that is your summation and not mine. That is why there are 12 on a jury. To collectively look at the crime the evidence and find for guilt. Even then people may disagree on the details. Look at the guilt phase of the arias trial. All felt she was guilty, Some thought she was guilty of felony murder and some premeditated and felony murder. But they all believed she murdered him.
That is all this is too.

Too be clear, they all agreed on premeditation, they just couldn't come to an agreement on felony murder, which is probably a blessing in disguise.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I am not ganging up on you. You have openly posted how you feel, and I have done the same.

Here's the thing. I have been here for 13 years, and I have never been reprimanded by another poster about my opinion while following a trial. In the trial that shall not be named, I gave up trying to post my opinion because of all of the reminders that were posted. I decided that I am not going to back down from my opinion about AS. And guess, what? My opinion of her being a liar is now a fact supported by a jury of her peers.

Now, with that said, I am not responding to anymore posts that I find disingenuous. IMO, it is disingenuous to say that there is no proof of an affair. Because if you knew the contents of the eMails, or watched the testimony about said eMails, there is no way you would say that.

As always, JMO. And I don't need to be reminded about the mods. I don't intend to make their job any harder than it already is.

I think you misunderstood. I am not reprimanding any one about their opinion. EVER. I believe everyone needs to figure things out for themselves.

I was just talking about how sometimes when someone does not agree with the masses or is slower about getting to where the majority is it can be overwhelming. I changed my mind yesterday on the relationship after listening to the closing from the prosecutor and seeing it all laid out for me. I had watched the closings but somehow missed that part. Seeing it again brought it together for me.

I am sorry. I did not mean at all to make you feel reprimanded..

 

[gitana1]

I have also read that the Sneiderman's have filed to have the insurance money placed in a trust fund for the kids so that no one else can ever touch it. And there is a wrongful death suit against Andrea and Hemy.

BTW, can they do that if she hasn't been convicted of murder yet?

Yes. Usually, people wait with such cases because a person facing criminal charges in connection with such a case cannot be compelled to answer questions via discovery or at a trial, regarding the death.

I want to say something here, though. I do not believe that she will ever be charged again with murder. They just didn't have enough and I don't know that Hemy's words in the future would be enough. Any defense attorney would have a field day with the testimony of that character.

However, AS knows the truth and she has to live with the truth of her character and her soul, for the rest of her life. And when bad people die who have done bad things they never were held accountable for, nor ever repented of, they go screaming into death, filled with fear and not an ounce of peace.

I think AS at the least, knew the murder was going to occur. She is going to face justice for that in some manner.

In Simpson's case, the case was lost because of the two lead prosecutors. They could have chose to rehabilitate Mark Fuhrman, and the case wouldn't have been lost. They could have also charged him with 2nd degree murder, and they would have won.

CA was overcharged. The state was too confident. She was guilty of child neglect resulting in death.

You also don't see proof of an affair, which is plain as day. You pick and choose which words of Hemy's to believe, but believe the convicted liar AS. You can't have it both ways. AS is not a victim of anyone but her own manipulative self. She manipulated HN into doing what he did, and then took up with another married man with a pregnant wife. And yet, you put AS up for "victim of the century." I just don't get it.

JMO

Not to derail the thread, but I don't believe, as an attorney familiar with evidence, that casey anthony was a bit overcharged. There was strong evidence that she premeditated the death of her child.

I think the state was a bit too confident, though and thus slipped over some necessary evidence, such as evidence that casey needed to get rid of Caylee, in her mind, in order to be free and be with her new guy, unfettered, who really didn't want a young child around.

I also think they were hampered by some of the judge's rulings, like the exclusion of cindy anthony's myspace posting and most especially, the sequestration of the jury. That sequestration amounted to punishment, IMO.

Regardless, even with the failures and the detrimental rulings, the state presented enough for a finding of premeditated murder.

But don't take my word for it. How about a judge's?:

The judge who presided over the trial of Casey Anthony said Monday he believed there was enough evidence to convict the Florida mother who was acquitted of murdering her 2-year-old daughter. Judge Belvin Perry told NBC's "Today" show that he thought there was sufficient evidence for a conviction on a first-degree murder charge, even though much of the evidence was circumstantial.
When he read the jury's verdict, Belvin said he felt "surprise, shock, disbelief" and read it twice.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...nce-judge-belvin-perry-convict_n_3223356.html

Judge Perry has been a judge since 1989. That's 24 years. Frankly, I'm kind of surprised that so many lay people feel they would know more about what was proved and what casey anthony was guilty of, than a judge! :angel:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Too be clear, the all agreed on premeditation, they just couldn't come to an agreement on felony murder, which is probably a blessing in disguise.

Yes you are correct. I got that backwards! Thanks.