GUILTY IN - Amanda Blackburn, 28, pregnant, murdered, Indianapolis, 10 Nov 2015 #4

[Lilibet]

What do you, or anyone else, think of this statement during the Tuesday, Nov. 24th hearing:

The court documents state that Taylor “caused termination of a human pregnancy” when police say he shot and killed Blackburn.

The two men gave short “yes” or “no” answers, except when the judge asked about a speedy trial.

“I don’t want that,” Watson remarked.

http://wishtv.com/2015/11/24/dna-ev...ds-help-track-down-blackburn-murder-suspects/

It sounds to me as if Watson is waiving his right to a speedy trial, guaranteed by the sixth Ammendment.

Each state has a statute or constitutional provision limiting the time an accused person may be held before trial, which varies by state. Charges must be dismissed and the defendant released if the period expires without trial. However, defendants often waive the right to a speedy trial in order to prepare a stronger defense

In addition to allowing time to prepare a stronger defense, another advantage to a defendant who is guilty in waiving a speedy trial is that witnesses may die or forget details.

The passage of time alone may lead to the loss of witnesses through death or other reasons and the blurring of memories of available witnesses.

Watson may figure that it's to his advantage, for both of these reasons, to waive a speedy trial. I'm following an obscure trial in which the wife and a friend of the defendant are now claiming they don't remember certain details that they knew three years ago. They are stonewalling while on the witness stand. I would not be surprised if this happens in this case. JMO

http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/speedy-trial/

 

[bessie]

What do you, or anyone else, think of this statement during the Tuesday, Nov. 24th hearing:

The court documents state that Taylor “caused termination of a human pregnancy” when police say he shot and killed Blackburn.

The two men gave short “yes” or “no” answers, except when the judge asked about a speedy trial.

“I don’t want that,” Watson remarked.

http://wishtv.com/2015/11/24/dna-ev...ds-help-track-down-blackburn-murder-suspects/

He doesn't want to be rushed through the system, which is what he might believe to be the cause of his 2012 conviction. So, I'd agree with Lilibet that he believes given more time, his attorney will be able to build a stronger defense. I'm not so sure he comprehends all of the advantages and implications, though.

 

[DeDee]

It sounds to me as if Watson is waiving his right to a speedy trial, guaranteed by the sixth Ammendment.

In addition to allowing time to prepare a stronger defense, another advantage to a defendant who is guilty in waiving a speedy trial is that witnesses may die or forget details.

Watson may figure that it's to his advantage, for both of these reasons, to waive a speedy trial. I'm following an obscure trial in which the wife and a friend of the defendant are now claiming they don't remember certain details that they knew three years ago. They are stonewalling while on the witness stand. I would not be surprised if this happens in this case. JMO

http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/speedy-trial/

Thank you lilibet. Yes, I understand about our 6th amendments rights and all that logical jazz. But the DNA on the pink sweater links Jalen Watson to the ATM. The receipt for the $400 cash withdrawal was left inside the stolen Sebring that was used during the crime along with the stolen pink sweater. The police have the video from the ATM showing JW wearing a hoodie and the stolen pink sweater. One would think these guys wanted to be caught!

None of that aforementioned particular evidence is disputable. This receipt, the video and pink sweater evidence will not fade nor go away. No eyewitnesses are necessary. I was considering more on the lines of others who may be also be arrested. Perhaps he would claim he was being held at gunpoint during the ATM transaction or that his family had been threatened if he did not obey orders.

Now, on to my next question and this one may have been discussed ad nauseam already so maybe someone could lead me to the direction to read those comments. Why did the perps steal bed sheets? One can imagine they were going to serve a purpose, but for what? Did they intend to wrap Amanda in a kidnapping extortion plot? Those bed sheets are gnawing on my mind yet I cannot figure out what the purpose for them would be.

Any and all bed sheet theories are also appreciated. TIA

 

[bessie]

I hope LE has more exact timing than the neighbor's guesstimate on the timing of the gunshots, to place only LT there as the shooter. This is just screaming 'reasonable doubt' to me. I dearly hope that I am wrong on this and you are right, Bessie.

I don't understand your concerns. Reasonable doubt of what? Doubt that LT was the triggerman as opposed to JW or DG?

 

[bessie]

Thank you lilibet. Yes, I understand about our 6th amendments rights and all that logical jazz. But the DNA on the pink sweater links Jalen Watson to the ATM. The receipt for the $400 cash withdrawal was left inside the stolen Sebring that was used during the crime along with the stolen pink sweater. The police have the video from the ATM showing JW wearing a hoodie and the stolen pink sweater. One would think these guys wanted to be caught!

None of that aforementioned particular evidence is disputable. This receipt, the video and pink sweater evidence will not fade nor go away. No eyewitnesses are necessary. I was considering more on the lines of others who may be also be arrested. Perhaps he would claim he was being held at gunpoint during the ATM transaction or that his family had been threatened if he did not obey orders.

No offense, DeDee, but that claim from a convicted burglar captured on video in a burglary earlier that morning is far-fetched, to say the least.

Now, on to my next question and this one may have been discussed ad nauseam already so maybe someone could lead me to the direction to read those comments. Why did the perps steal bed sheets? One can imagine they were going to serve a purpose, but for what? Did they intend to wrap Amanda in a kidnapping extortion plot? Those bed sheets are gnawing on my mind yet I cannot figure out what the purpose for them would be.

Any and all bed sheet theories are also appreciated. TIA

If I were loading four televisions into a vehicle, I'd cover them with sheets or blankets to protect them.


ETA: Quote from an earlier post by Lilibet.

I agree that the sheets were used to carry their loot. When our home was burglarized, they took our bedspread.

 

[MaxManning]

Thank you lilibet. Yes, I understand about our 6th amendments rights and all that logical jazz. But the DNA on the pink sweater links Jalen Watson to the ATM. The receipt for the $400 cash withdrawal was left inside the stolen Sebring that was used during the crime along with the stolen pink sweater. The police have the video from the ATM showing JW wearing a hoodie and the stolen pink sweater. One would think these guys wanted to be caught!

None of that aforementioned particular evidence is disputable. This receipt, the video and pink sweater evidence will not fade nor go away. No eyewitnesses are necessary. I was considering more on the lines of others who may be also be arrested. Perhaps he would claim he was being held at gunpoint during the ATM transaction or that his family had been threatened if he did not obey orders.

Now, on to my next question and this one may have been discussed ad nauseam already so maybe someone could lead me to the direction to read those comments. Why did the perps steal bed sheets? One can imagine they were going to serve a purpose, but for what? Did they intend to wrap Amanda in a kidnapping extortion plot? Those bed sheets are gnawing on my mind yet I cannot figure out what the purpose for them would be.

Any and all bed sheet theories are also appreciated. TIA

I think that if this didn't result in murder, all the craziness of what they did wouldn't matter, they'd likely have gotten away with it. As I mentioned earlier alot of resources were added to this case because it was a murder. I wouldn't doubt that they have been equally dumb in the past and not been caught because no one took the time to investigate. In researching this case I have seen articles about the enormous backlog of cold cases in indianapolis previous to this murder, so that is what I base my opinion on. Would they even do a DNA test to track down and catch a burglar ? I'm asking, but I kind of doubt it.

If you believe the account of the suspects, they didn't even know it was murder until after the ATM shenanigans. If they weren't expecting to murder that would also suggest a "oh *advertiser censored**!" mentality when it happened and might not have even thought about the receipt that they threw under the car seat because they had a massive change to plan. They certainly weren't focusing on "now... what do we have from the burglary on san clemente".

So, I am certainly theorizing here, but this aspect to me personally lends to the the non-planned murder and fits the police narrative of a burglary gone bad. Sooooooo much carelessness.

The gunpoint ATM thing, seems rather far-fetched considering they were all burglarizing together earlier already. None of them strike me as the type that need to be convinced to burglarize or use an ATM card if they thought they could get away with it.

The sheets and the oranges are odd. I mean, we can't assume that they just stick to valuables. Maybe they had no sheets at their new place ? It's about as good a guess as saying they wanted to wrap someone up for a kidnapping. But the duct tape does fit your theory.

But I guess my question would be, if that was the case , why go out and use the ATM card first when you will have her with you ? Why not just leave with her ? Why leave and come back ?


Might be good answers for that, but at the moment I can't think of any.

 

[bessie]

I think that if this didn't result in murder, all the craziness of what they did wouldn't matter, they'd likely have gotten away with it. As I mentioned earlier alot of resources were added to this case because it was a murder. I wouldn't doubt that they have been equally dumb in the past and not been caught because no one took the time to investigate. In researching this case I have seen articles about the enormous backlog of cold cases in indianapolis previous to this murder, so that is what I base my opinion on. Would they even do a DNA test to track down and catch a burglar ? I'm asking, but I kind of doubt it.

If you believe the account of the suspects, they didn't even know it was murder until after the ATM shenanigans. If they weren't expecting to murder that would also suggest a "oh *advertiser censored**!" mentality when it happened and might not have even thought about the receipt that they threw under the car seat because they had a massive change to plan. They certainly weren't focusing on "now... what do we have from the burglary on san clemente".

So, I am certainly theorizing here, but this aspect to me personally lends to the the non-planned murder and fits the police narrative of a burglary gone bad. Sooooooo much carelessness.

The gunpoint ATM thing, seems rather far-fetched considering they were all burglarizing together earlier already. None of them strike me as the type that need to be convinced to burglarize or use an ATM card if they thought they could get away with it.

The sheets and the oranges are odd. I mean, we can't assume that they just stick to valuables. Maybe they had no sheets at their new place ? It's about as good a guess as saying they wanted to wrap someone up for a kidnapping. But the duct tape does fit your theory.

But I guess my question would be, if that was the case , why go out and use the ATM card first when you will have her with you ? Why not just leave with her ? Why leave and come back ?


Might be good answers for that, but at the moment I can't think of any.

Except that we don't know if they brought the duct tape with them, or if it was found inside the home. I have a roll of duct tape in a kitchen drawer right now. I'd bet many others do, as well.

 

[MaxManning]

Not sure myself if duct tape is a common tool of the trade for a burglar. anyone ?

I can think of uses, such as wrapping things up in say a sheet and duct taping together ? A sheet as a protective covering for a big screen tv ? Also looks a whole lot less suspicious in a vehicle than 4 TVs.

Being as the duct tape wasn't used at the crime scene, or at least that we know, that also fits the idea that murder might have changed plans drastically.

If murder was primary motive, then why wouldn't they use those sheets and duct tape ? If kidnapping was motive, why bother with all the rest, just take her.

duct tape and sheets is definitely curious items to me, but I will admit I'm not sure about how burglars might use them.

 

[MaxManning]

Except that we don't know if they brought the duct tape with them, or if it was found inside the home. I have a roll of duct tape in a kitchen drawer right now. I'd bet many others do, as well.

Yes, I agree that I am making an assumption. But merely theorizing what it would be used for if it were indeed brought by them.

The PC listed the item, and I'm sure they left out many other items that were present, so they chose to include that item as it potentially fits their narrative. So, that's why I chose to make that assumption. Certainly I agree that it's a very common household item.

So if we accept it was a burglary. What would a burglar use duct tape for ? (my 2nd post had some theories)

 

[Peppery]

Sheets can be used to make a sack to carry smaller items.

They drank beer and wine at the first Sunnyfield house, they have a history with drugs, they may have thought it was funny or a way to mess with the minds of the homeowner. The oranges were found in the Sebring.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[bessie]

Sheets: Taken from a home where four televisions also were stolen. Simple answer: Sheets were used to protect the televisions.

Duct Tape: Recovered from the murder scene. Source unknown. Might or might not have been used in the crime.

Duct tape recovered with other evidence could be an indication it was, in fact, used in the crime. Earphones also were recovered. Because the source of neither is known, the possibility remains that one or both were found in the home, and used in an unplanned act. For example, a suspect unexpectedly finds a victim at home, decides it's necessary to bind the victim, and searches for an object that will serve the purpose.

The presumption that either sheets or duct tape were part of a planned kidnapping can't be made because no kidnapping occurred.

JMO

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Thank you lilibet. Yes, I understand about our 6th amendments rights and all that logical jazz. But the DNA on the pink sweater links Jalen Watson to the ATM. The receipt for the $400 cash withdrawal was left inside the stolen Sebring that was used during the crime along with the stolen pink sweater. The police have the video from the ATM showing JW wearing a hoodie and the stolen pink sweater. One would think these guys wanted to be caught!

None of that aforementioned particular evidence is disputable. This receipt, the video and pink sweater evidence will not fade nor go away. No eyewitnesses are necessary. I was considering more on the lines of others who may be also be arrested. Perhaps he would claim he was being held at gunpoint during the ATM transaction or that his family had been threatened if he did not obey orders.

Now, on to my next question and this one may have been discussed ad nauseam already so maybe someone could lead me to the direction to read those comments. Why did the perps steal bed sheets? One can imagine they were going to serve a purpose, but for what? Did they intend to wrap Amanda in a kidnapping extortion plot? Those bed sheets are gnawing on my mind yet I cannot figure out what the purpose for them would be.

Any and all bed sheet theories are also appreciated. TIA

The only thing the evidence listed above proves is theft.

I'm pretty sure they took the sheet to protect the screens of the TVs they stole. When I moved, I wrapped my TVs in blankets for exactly that reason.

 

[MaxManning]

The presumption that either sheets or duct tape were part of a planned kidnapping can't be made because no kidnapping occurred.

JMO

I agree completely that it's a big presumption to make. I just don't understand why they'd not just take her instead of monkey around with ATM cards and such, was just saying it fit her theory.

I kind of think covering the tv's or other items to prevent damage/scratches and make them less suspicious is most likely. I have done that exact thing when moving before. I have used a comforter and duct tape around a large TV to protect the screen.

I myself find it highly unlikely that there was a kidnapping plot for above stated reason (and many more), but just because a kidnapping didn't happen doesn't mean you can't theorize that might have been a motive with those two items. So many other details make that highly implausible to me personally.

Regardless, my post was more in regards to what they might be used for in a burglary.

 

[Hoosgirl]

Interview with the first burglary victim (the one who was home):

http://wishtv.com/2015/11/23/woman-burglarized-by-blackburn-suspects-still-shaken/

 

[bessie]

Question: Prior to the release of the probable cause affidavit, does anyone recall a news report which stated AB was killed by a gunshot wound to the back of the head? I only recall the coroner's statement that COD was a gsw to the head.

"Amanda Blackburn, 28, has been pronounced dead, the coroner’s office said. The cause of death was a gunshot wound to the head, and the manner of death was ruled a homicide."
http://fox59.com/2015/11/12/pastors-wife-dies-after-being-shot-during-robbery/

Might or might not be relevant, but note the CI's statement to detectives on November 21:

PC affidavit pdf p. 24

"Taylor then told them that he leaned over body and shot her in the back of the head."


Also from the affidavit, pdf p. 18:

"Dr. Cavanaugh determined Blackburn had sustained a gunshot wound to the back of the head."

https://www.scribd.com/doc/291143533/Affidavit-of-Probable-Cause-in-Amanda-Blackburn-Case

If nothing else, it's a good example of why LE withholds details.

 

[MaxManning]

Question: Prior to the release of the probable cause affidavit, does anyone recall a news report which stated AB was killed by a gunshot wound to the back of the head? I only recall the coroner's statement that COD was a gsw to the head.

"Amanda Blackburn, 28, has been pronounced dead, the coroner’s office said. The cause of death was a gunshot wound to the head, and the manner of death was ruled a homicide."
http://fox59.com/2015/11/12/pastors-wife-dies-after-being-shot-during-robbery/

Might or might not be relevant, but note the CI's statement to detectives on November 21:

PC affidavit pdf p. 24

"Taylor then told them that he leaned over body and shot her in the back of the head."


Also from the affidavit, pdf p. 18:

"Dr. Cavanaugh determined Blackburn had sustained a gunshot wound to the back of the head."

https://www.scribd.com/doc/291143533/Affidavit-of-Probable-Cause-in-Amanda-Blackburn-Case

If nothing else, it's a good example of why LE withholds details.

Very good point. I had heard rumors like hand, stomach, head before PC - and the possibility of bullet going through hand into stomach, only 2 bullets. But that was not from police.

 

[bessie]

Very good point. I had heard rumors like hand, stomach, head before PC - and the possibility of bullet going through hand into stomach, only 2 bullets. But that was not from police.

Right. There were rumors that "sources said" AB was shot in the hand, abdomen and head; hand, back, and head; etc., etc., but to my recollection no one specified "back" of the head. The fact that CI included that detail supports the veracity of his statement as only the killer, an eyewitness, or an individual who was given an accounting from the first two could have been that specific.

 

[MaxManning]

Right. There were rumors that "sources said" AB was shot in the hand, abdomen and head; hand, back, and head; etc., etc., but to my recollection no one specified "back" of the head. The fact that CI included that detail supports the veracity of his statement as only the killer, an eyewitness, or an individual who was given an accounting from the first two could have been that specific.

I just don't think anything but him being at the location at time of murder and having the gun that shot those bullets is needed. At that point, why does what anyone says need to carry much weight ? But maybe that was used to trip them up.

 

[bessie]

Interview with the first burglary victim (the one who was home):

http://wishtv.com/2015/11/23/woman-burglarized-by-blackburn-suspects-still-shaken/

The victim's phone isn't listed among the stolen items. Suggests that they removed the phone from her room so she couldn't call 911 had she awakened while they were in the home. Yet, they weren't interested in stealing it.

“I woke up looking for my phone to make sure I get to work on time and I noticed that it was missing...”

[...]

"S said the suspects knocked over her plants and got away with her laptop, purse, keys, and her car."

Per the affidavit:

"...woke up and realized that her phone was missing from her bedroom."

[...]

"Her Apple MacBook laptop was missing along with her purse and keys."

Why mention it? AB's phone was left behind, as well. Some have questioned why "real" burglars wouldn't have taken it, the implication being that the break in at AB's home was staged.

 

[MaxManning]

If you are a burglar and things go wrong and you end up murdering someone, I doubt you are still in burglar mode. Also, if you were "staging" a break in, wouldn't you break the door or try to fake forced entry after the fact ? Just saying, if staging is your goal, then thats not consistent with what happened. But path of least resistance is likely what burglars do, they just find easy entry. Their goal is not to be detected.