imstilla.grandma
Believer of Miracles
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2018
- Messages
- 31,997
- Reaction score
- 216,909
"He said I need help burying the body."
"What was your plan of disposing of Holly's body."
"Gut her."
"It was disturbing to say the least. If you remember, talking about what happened behind the truck," Leonardo said.
Autry testified:
"I grabbed the upper torso of Ms. Bobo's body. Zach left the tailgate down. I brought the torso to the tailgate where he grabbed the legs."
The jury convicted and sentenced Adams to life. Autry got eight years.
But now he says he made it all up.
"The question is can he prove this was a tall tale. It was a lie?"
![]()
Key witness says he lied and it could mean a new trial for the Holly Bobo case
A judge is now considering a request for a new trial from Zach Adams, who was convicted seven years ago in the murder of Holly Bobo. The key witness against Adams now says he lied at trial.www.newschannel5.com
Totally agree! It blows my mind how they convicted on the rape when there was no proof. Obviously she was killed/murdered and there was enough of her remains found to support this fact. Where is the other evidence! And did anyone but me find it strange that TB alibi was he was shopping with his wife at a salvage place for a bath tub. Red flag much!The State has backed themselves in a corner with giving Autry a plea deal in the first place. I would not have believed a word he said. They made a deal with a devil to get a conviction. Nichols said they had more evidence, besides Autry, to uphold the conviction...What was that? If you had the evidence, you wouldn't need Autry's plea deal. There was several rumors, innuendo, and just plain lies to wade through in this case. What exactly was the concrete evidence, besides Autry, that convicted ZA and DA (I honestly question his "confession" after the recent 20/20 episode)? Out of the 3, I believe JA would be the worst, JMO.
I have been going back and looking at the evidence from the trial according to the new reports. What I could tell was ZA was convicted on the testimony of others like JA-- no DNA evidence that I have saw yet. I have such a hard time "trusting" DA (Zach's brother) testimony, considering he lived with a cop for awhile during this, which could IMO "taint his story. JA got partial immunity so his testimony will benefit himself so I have a hard time with "trusting" his testimony. As far as TB, I haven't seen why LE didn't consider him a viable suspect (Dicus did, but was later accused of tunnel vision) His alibi--AllGoods shopping for a bathtub--could never be verified by employees at the store (that I have saw). He claims he had a receipt, but they only found a handwritten one (suspect to me) days later. TB fit CB's description, more than ZA, SA, and JA did. This is a mostly circumstantial case to me. In all honesty, I don't understand how you don't have some DNA (besides Holly's) on the several items found in this case during the searches--the lunchbox, the papers, the cell phone, SIM card, etc--as well as the suspects' vehicles and residences. Cases are solved decades later with just a little DNA now. I am not saying TBI are wrong at all. I am just saying there are a lot of questions that have never been adequately answered IMO. TBI was under a lot of pressure to solve this case and I am always skeptical when the SOs are so easily cleared right away. I will also say I do not believe anything JA says now or then. There was a lot of questionable people in this case with testimony I would have found hard to believe, and JA is at the top of my list. No way should a plea bargain ever been given to him.Totally agree! It blows my mind how they convicted on the rape when there was no proof. Obviously she was killed/murdered and there was enough of her remains found to support this fact. Where is the other evidence! And did anyone but me find it strange that TB alibi was he was shopping with his wife at a salvage place for a bath tub. Red flag much!
There are several statements like this--CB and ZA being meth buddies--that should have made someone question the veracity of his testimony. I never believed this statement for a minute and never saw anywhere were this was proven either. Most of JA's testimony seemed self-serving to me--and a little outrageous in some details. I don't believe him at all. IMO his endgame was to get the least amount of time as possible and he concocted a story that put him with as little participation in this horrific crime. JA would be the ringleader, not the follower IMO.If you believe JA original Testimony then you have to consider the reason ZA was at the BOBO house to begin with. JA said that ZA said he went there to teach CB how to make Meth. Why would JA lie about that. He was believed to be telling the truth about the most horrific details on what happened to HB and they pretty much convicted ZA on JA Testimony. Why lie about CB. It just really hit m some kind of way.
Of course now JA is recanting his whole Testimony. Its such a mess imo.
I guess I got the answer to that question in the next article I posted. Can you believe anything this man says?------>>>![]()
Judge to decide soon on whether Holly Bobo killer gets new trial
A judge will decide soon whether to hold an evidentiary hearing after Jason Autry recanted testimony which led to the conviction of Zach Adams for the murder of Holly Bobo. Adams wants a new trial.www.newschannel5.com
Who is the "we" who helped him concoct the story?