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.
<modsnip>

If only you held the same level of scrutiny to the guys charged here as you are applying to Davey, you might just be seen as objective. imo

At least watch the full press event with the details on the investigation, that seems only fair.
 
<modsnip>

In just the small amount of browsing social media on these guys I've done, these are known gang members. And police obviously have far more information than they are putting out to the public right now as to how these crimes are related. Aside from the fact that one of them is actually talking it sounds like.
 
codis hit was for mr. watson - something about a cloth over his face at the ATM? I will have to rewatch.
 
nerdgirl said:
codis hit was for mr. watson - something about a cloth over his face at the ATM? I will have to rewatch.
Click to expand...

That's correct. From the sweater Watson used to cover his face at the ATM. I caught part of the presser. I believe the last man to speak said no sexual assault charges are being filed in Amanda's case. So any SA charges must be for the other case. Did anyone else catch that? I hope I heard correctly!

Ah - thanks Ontario Mom! So no SA. Thank goodness!
 
Not nearly as much information released here than I expected/hoped for, to be honest.
 
MsMarple said:
That's correct. From the sweater he used to cover his face at the ATM. I caught part of the presser. I believe the last man to speak said no sexual assault charges are being filed in Amanda's case. So any SA charges must be for the other case. Did anyone else catch that? I hope I heard correctly!

Ah - thanks Ontario Mom! So no SA. Thank goodness!
Click to expand...

That is what I heard as well, but it did not sound right so I wasn't sure if I heard it correctly, I wasn't sure if they were talking about Watson and maybe not Taylor?
 
CrazytownUSA said:
In just the small amount of browsing social media on these guys I've done, these are known gang members. And police obviously have far more information than they are putting out to the public right now as to how these crimes are related. Aside from the fact that one of them is actually talking it sounds like.
Click to expand...

Yes of course they would have terrible things on social media since they are gang members. That doesn't mean they carried out this specific crime. Those are two unrelated things. Let's see what the police have. Yes they are horrible people so why didn't they kill or harm the toddler as well?
 
nerdgirl said:
That is what I heard as well, but it did not sound right so I wasn't sure if I heard it correctly, I wasn't sure if they were talking about Watson and maybe not Taylor?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I should have been clearer - they were talking about Watson at the ATM.
 
Ontario Mom said:
Obviously there won't be any charges for poor baby Evie Grace, since:

"(4) knowingly or intentionally kills a fetus that has attained viability (as defined in IC 16-18-2-365); commits murder, a felony"
("Viability", for purposes of IC 16-34, means the ability of a fetus to live outside the mother's womb - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/incode/16/18/2/16-18-2-365#sthash.nkHDl00L.dpuf)

AB was only 3 months along, so that baby would not have been able to survive on her own, outside of mama.
Click to expand...

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
 
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?
 
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...

Sometimes being wrong is awesome. Thank you for posting that. I hope these monsters are nailed to the wall with every charge possible.
 
aa9511 said:
Yes of course they would have terrible things on social media since they are gang members. That doesn't mean they carried out this specific crime. Those are two unrelated things. Let's see what the police have. Yes they are horrible people so why didn't they kill or harm the toddler as well?
Click to expand...

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 ?
 
MsMarple said:
That's correct. From the sweater Watson used to cover his face at the ATM. I caught part of the presser. I believe the last man to speak said no sexual assault charges are being filed in Amanda's case. So any SA charges must be for the other case. Did anyone else catch that? I hope I heard correctly!

Ah - thanks Ontario Mom! So no SA. Thank goodness!
Click to expand...

I will have to listen again, but I believe he said no sexual charges at this time based on evidence. Sadly, I dont think the door is shut on this issue. I think it's a matter of whether they have sufficient evidence to prosecute. I hope I am wrong, but there has been too much chatter to disregard the rumors. He did not deny that rape occurred; he said no sexual charges now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 109 more.
Total: 2,411 (members: 110, guests: 2,301)

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
2,301
Total visitors
2,411
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,476
Messages
18,109,182
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top