GUILTY IL - Katrina Smith, 30, beaten to death, Machesney Park, 23 Oct 2012 - #2

[cubfan4life]

No I don't think you are getting it. Circumstantial evidence IS REAL evidence, always has been. It isn't theory. It's kind of like you go outside and the grass, your car and the sidewalk are all wet. You didn't see it rain, but you can safely conclude that it did. You don't have to actually see the rain falling down to know that it did.

Proving a crime isn't always going to be cut and dried, most murderers don't leave a video of their crime so more often than not we have to rely on circumstantial evidence to tell the story. That's just the way it is..... Real life is not CSI.

I do get that. I just think there should be more than curcumstancial evidence. When Darlene Ewalt was killed her husband was arrested for it. It was solely a curcumstatial case and he could've very easily been convicted had it gone to trial. Didn't mean that it's not an important piece of the puzzle but when you're talking about many years possibly life sentences shouldn't there be more? Just my opinion

 

[Knox]

I do get that. I just think there should be more than curcumstancial evidence. When Darlene Ewalt was killed her husband was arrested for it. It was solely a curcumstatial case and he could've very easily been convicted had it gone to trial. Didn't mean that it's not an important piece of the puzzle but when you're talking about many years possibly life sentences shouldn't there be more? Just my opinion

I think it's premature to say there is only "circumstantial" evidence in Katrina's murder case. We certainly don't know what type of evidence the DA has.

 

[cubfan4life]

I think it's premature to say there is only "circumstantial" evidence in Katrina's murder case. We certainly don't know what type of evidence the DA has.

I have no idea what evidence they have obviously. Just mean that in my opinion cases need more than just circumstantial. If he did this in that house then undoubtedly they have much more.

 

[TallCoolOne]

I think it's premature to say there is only "circumstantial" evidence in Katrina's murder case. We certainly don't know what type of evidence the DA has.

I agree, LE has not revealed any more than what they absolutely had to in order to obtain an arrest. I have a feeling we are not going to hear their case until trial. They must have something or there would not have been an arrest.

Unfortunately what many people don't understand is that more often than not, the majority of evidence presented in trial is circumstantial. Blood evidence, saliva and fingerprint evidence are all circumstantial, which is more objective while direct evidence is subjective. One point of circumstantial evidence by itself may not prove anything, it's the accumulation of all evidence that tells the story. Jurors have to be intelligent enough to put those pieces together. Circumstantial evidence provides a more credible answer. Eyewitnesses can be wrong or their story may change over time as memories cloud, while phone records, saliva, blood evidence and the like is definitive and does not change. It is what it is......

Of course we have seen it in the past where individuals associated with the defense will come here and try to either explain away the evidence that points to the defendant or confuse people with hocus pocus. But to those of us who have been around the block a few times we recognize bumpkiss when we hear it. The truth will come out and the story will be told, we just have to wait for it.

 

[cubfan4life]

Hopefully LE were able to get copies of texts before they were gone. That could be very important in determining what was happening that night. All evidence is important as a whole.

 

[bessie]

Please continue here...

IL - Katrina A. Smith, 30, Machesney Park, 23 Oct 2012 - #3 *ARREST* - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community