GUILTY - Tammy Moorer trial for Kidnapping Heather Elvis, 8 Oct 2018 #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Richmond said:
On a legal note, if prosecutors had been allowed to try TM & SM together on these charges, Bri's testimony about what SM said to HE during the payphone call would have been admissible, correct? Since SM would be there to defend himself.

I don't really understand why the SC supreme court didn't allow them to be tried together. So much money has already been spent trying this case; it made sense on so many levels. What was the legal reason SC supreme court denied their request?
Click to expand...

The Judge said “if I allowed it, it was an error” regarding allowing Brianna to testify to the content of the call in trial 1, as it was heresay.

Unfortunately, I agree - now, of course it’s heresay, without a doubt. The only question is whether it should be allowed as an excited utterance (excited utterances can be allowed despite being heresay).

Strangely, he allowed it in the first trial, so I’m unsure why he flip-flopped, but whether it is an excited utterance is an interesting proposition. I would say no, unfortunately, but that’s just my opinion
 
UndiscoveredTruth said:
Looks like Tammy's lame attempt at straightening her hair!! LOL Sorry, I couldn't resist!! LOL
Click to expand...

And despite having the entire weekend, it doesn't look like she washed her hair.

She certainly spent some time applying makeup though. It's the most made up she's been all trial. Maybe she was watching the recorded video from Friday and didn't like what she saw.
 
jash said:
And despite having the entire weekend, it doesn't look like she washed her hair.

She certainly spent some time applying makeup though. It's the most made up she's been all trial. Maybe she was watching the recorded video from Friday and didn't like what she saw.
Click to expand...
LOL She actually looks better with no make-up, in my opinion. Ah well, this trial is a circus, she has to look the part, I guess!!
 
JerseyGirl said:
Hi everyone! In the words of the Judge on Friday, "I hope everyone had a great weekend!"

I watched the cross twice this weekend and I can't wait for the court to open. I also watched the footage for about 20 minutes on TM while she wrote down information and pushed around papers in her purple folder along with some exhibits into evidence that her lawyer handed her. It started at the 11 minute mark on Day 9. Someone mentioned it here again over the weekend and I was wondering if NL will address it after she sees the tape this time.

I hope to be around all day, real work calls so I'll be popping in and out and hope to catch up on any testimony from this morning at lunchtime.

Keep the tweets coming and any links to LIVE coverage and recorded testimony.

:D - with bells on!
Click to expand...
Actually starts in the morning first thing and you need to watch for about 25 minutes & then watch the Assistant Solicitor address the Court about it is it on WMBF. You are actually speaking of a different time than what we had all discussed, I think. What feed are you speaking of?
 
Simply Caustic said:
The Judge said “if I allowed it, it was an error” regarding allowing Brianna to testify to the content of the call in trial 1, as it was heresay.

Unfortunately, I agree - now, of course it’s heresay, without a doubt. The only question is whether it should be allowed as an excited utterance (excited utterances can be allowed despite being heresay).

Strangely, he allowed it in the first trial, so I’m unsure why he flip-flopped, but whether it is an excited utterance is an interesting proposition. I would say no, unfortunately, but that’s just my opinion
Click to expand...

It was a different Judge in SM's trial. Judge Dennis. He was a nightmare for the prosecution. Judge Culbertson was much better until he starting allowing the defense to put doctored facebook photos into evidence. (Face palm emoji here.)

EDITED to add: I may have misunderstood you. I know SM had two trials, and I don't remember whether Dennis allowed Bri's testimony about what was said in the phone call in his first trial and not the second.
 
For the first time, she isn't sitting there going through her plastic bin, writing on notepads or any of the other 'lawyer Tammy' things she was doing in days past. For a second she had her arms crossed like she was hugging herself...distressed much, TM?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 250 more.
Total: 3,025 (members: 251, guests: 2,774)

Online statistics

Members online
251
Guests online
2,774
Total visitors
3,025
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,664
Messages
18,097,933
Members
230,897
Latest member
sarahburhouse
Back
Top