IN - Amanda Blackburn, 28, pregnant, murdered, Indianapolis, 10 Nov 2015 - #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anybody familiar with The Wire will know there has been some Scott Templeton style reporting done by the Indy media in regards to this story.
 
Simon Gotch said:
Based on the evidence that was dropped in the presser, it looks like a good defense attorney could eat this up. These three all sound like pieces of garbage, but nothing I heard from the presser conclusively ties them to the murder or am I wrong here?
Click to expand...

He very clearly was not willing to share any info outside the probable cause/public info. They have more and are still investigating IMO.
 
Simon Gotch said:
Based on the evidence that was dropped in the presser, it looks like a good defense attorney could eat this up. These three all sound like pieces of garbage, but nothing I heard from the presser conclusively ties them to the murder or am I wrong here?
Click to expand...

At this point, I will have to agree with you that I'd like to hear quite a bit more! I'm sure we all agree on that.
 
Simon Gotch said:
Based on the evidence that was dropped in the presser, it looks like a good defense attorney could eat this up. These three all sound like pieces of garbage, but nothing I heard from the presser conclusively ties them to the murder or am I wrong here?
Click to expand...

I think they will still get a conviction, based on comments I've seen across the web (not on here). People want to see someone pay for his, and here come some **** gang members who have done burglaries. Their mind want to connect the two, because it's human nature that people want to make sense of something. It will not be hard to get a conviction. <modsnip>
 
Why no Larry Taylor mugshot ? Was charged first. Maybe those images are from the arrests a few days back based on non-related charges they were holding them on ?
 
<modsnip>

I don't get how DNA on a shirt from Watson while at a ATM transaction=Taylor murdered Amanda.
 
pappa rob said:
Wrong , Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-2-16 (2009) allows the state to seek an additional fixed term of imprisonment if a person, while committing or attempting to commit murder, caused the termination of a pregnancy. Prosecution of the murder or attempted murder and the enhancement of the penalty for that crime does not require proof that the person committing or attempting to commit the murder had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim was pregnant or that the defendant intended to cause the termination of a pregnancy. The additional consecutive term of imprisonment may be between six and 20 years. (2009 Ind. Acts, P.L. 40, SB 236)

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-42-2-1.5 defines aggravated battery as a person who knowingly or intentionally inflicts injury on a person that causes the loss of a fetus.
Viability is not included in all cases, extended charges are included in that case. http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx
Ind. Code Ann. § 35-41-1-25 defines serious bodily injury as bodily injury that causes the loss of a fetus.
Ind. Code Ann. § 35-42-2-1.5 defines aggravated battery as a person who knowingly or intentionally inflicts injury on a person that causes the loss of a fetus.
Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-2-9(b)(16) allows the state to seek either a death sentence or a sentence of life imprisonment without parole for murder by alleging the victim of the murder was pregnant and the murder resulted in the intentional killing of a fetus that has attained viability.
Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-2-16 (2009) allows the state to seek an additional fixed term of imprisonment if a person, while committing or attempting to commit murder, caused the termination of a pregnancy. Prosecution of the murder or attempted murder and the enhancement of the penalty for that crime does not require proof that the person committing or attempting to commit the murder had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim was pregnant or that the defendant intended to cause the termination of a pregnancy. The additional consecutive term of imprisonment may be between six and 20 years. (2009 Ind. Acts, P.L. 40, SB 236)
http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx
Click to expand...


This is kind of iffy for me because it seems like it could get caught up in technicalities, for instance, was she 12 weeks LMP (which would be 10 weeks actual development). Had she been to the doctor? Had she had an ultrasound?

I am personally not familiar with these laws. I am simply wondering if the fetus could be known to be a viable pregnancy at such an early date.

Don't get me wrong: I think it is horrible she was shot and her death ended both her life and the baby's life.

Its a long way of saying it wouldn't surprise me if they don't upcharge it for the pregnancy.
 
aa9511 said:
I think they will still get a conviction, based on comments I've seen across the web (not on here). People want to see someone pay for his, and here come some **** gang members who have done burglaries. Their mind want to connect the two, because it's human nature that people want to make sense of something. It will not be hard to get a conviction. No one wants to believe that the husband did it.
Click to expand...

I'm still not clear on why you seemingly find it implausible that these guys who have burglary backgrounds and from what police are saying had in their possession a bank card from the blackburn residence might have been responsible ?

I'm not even saying for sure they did it either, I haven't heard conclusive evidence. However, I am seeing it as plausible and open to hearing how they came to these conclusions and what evidence they have in regards to these guys possessing that atm card.

Isn't that fair ?
 
Oh my gosh people... DB is off limits!!!! :gaah:

ETA: I see the post disappeared already!
 
MaxManning said:
I am just as interested in hearing more evidence as you. But I think your scrutiny before hearing how they came to their conclusions is not showing much objectivity.

I personally think it's plausible that anyone would choose not to kill a toddler that is not old enough to identify them. Why do you see that as implausible ?
Click to expand...

<modsnip> That makes sense. Now this other story seems very risky. If they were raping the woman, that means they would know beforehand that they had to kill her. If they didn't mean to kill her, they would have gone in wearing coverings on their face. It just isn't adding up.
 
Simon Gotch said:
Based on the evidence that was dropped in the presser, it looks like a good defense attorney could eat this up. These three all sound like pieces of garbage, but nothing I heard from the presser conclusively ties them to the murder or am I wrong here?
Click to expand...

I think we have to keep in mind that LE doesn't always share (and quite frankly, shouldn't share) all the information they have. They obviously have enough to arrest and charge these three. I'm feel very confident that LE has plenty of evidence in this case.

edited to add: For those that perhaps weren't following earlier and didn't know, LE has stated that Amanda's husband Davey has been 100% CLEARED in this case.
 
I agree with LaborDayRN. I think it would be highly uncommon for LE to give much info. In terms of criminal defense, you really don't know what sort of case you have until you get the evidence - the witness statements, the confessions, the forensics, etc. What LE state in a a press conference isn't even going to come up at trial. :twocents:
 
I'm hoping against hope that no SA charge means no rape. Unfortunately, it's more likely that they're waiting on DNA. IMO, there was more than one donor and they need to profile them all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
aa9511 said:
What I know is that the father would not the born child to die in his quest to get rid of he wife. That makes sense. Now this other story seems very risky. If they were raping the woman, that means they would know beforehand that they had to kill her. If they didn't mean to kill her, they would have gone in wearing coverings on their face. It just isn't adding up.
Click to expand...

Is posting images of stolen property, drugs, and large amounts of money while brandishing a gun seen as "risky" behavior ? Especially when you are on parole ? Is the very act of burglarizing, not risky ?

Why is it implausible to you that they wouldn't be taking risks ?

Look at the case evidence of 2 of these suspects in past convictions. They did some rather brazen things without any masks or fear.

Doesn't mean they are guilty. But does mean it's plausible they will take dumb risks.

Also, if they didn't think she was home why would they go in with anything covering their face ? Is that not plausible ? If they did indeed rob the san clemente property earlier in the morning -- confirmed as having no masks and people sleeping in the house - doesn't it seem plausible that they might do the same thing at blackburns ? They didn't kill anyone at san clemente residence. right ?

Nothing conclusive, just saying, it's very plausible given what we do know. So why suggest that it is not ?
 
Can someone list out for me (or point me to it) who was charged with what?

Not all three were charged with her murder, correct?
 
Peppery said:
I'm hoping against hope that no SA charge means no rape. Unfortunately, it's more likely that they're waiting on DNA. IMO, there was more than one donor and they need to profile them all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Dammit, why did you have to say this?! NO!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 150 more.
Total: 2,192 (members: 151, guests: 2,041)

Online statistics

Members online
151
Guests online
2,041
Total visitors
2,192
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,484
Messages
18,109,354
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top