Simon Gotch
Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2015
- Messages
- 82
- Reaction score
- 13
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.
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?
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?
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?
Jalen Watson and Diano Gordon mugs
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/...burn-case-murder-arrest-made-monday/76246780/
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
I want to see Captain Converse!
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.
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 ?
Did you notice him on the side? I was so hoping he'd speak! That was the main reason I watched.
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?
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.
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