Laura Babcock Murder Trial 12.06.17 - Closing Arguments - Day 2

[Jasper52]

Lisa Hepfner‏@HefCHCHNews

When you're an addict, the only thing that counts is the next hit, and what you'll do to get the next hit. Dungey urges the jury to keep that in mind. Cronin was stealing to get money for drugs when he was arrested, and wanted to make a deal.

 

[canadiangirl]

Dungey seems to be going between two defenses:

1 - the murder happened but my client wasn't there

2 - no crime has been committed and LB is merely missing.

I believe he would be more effective if he tried to stick with one narrative only.

I think either is ok if he's trying to say they don't know what happened to LB and whatever did happen MS wasn’t there or part of. He's trying to raise doubt

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

 

[meterclicks]

"He's oblivious, he says. He was whacked out from drugs," Dungey says about Liberatore. "So what's his statement worth?"
by Adam Carter 12:15 PM

Dungey now focusing on the effect of heroin on memory.
by Adam Carter 12:15 PM

 

[Jealoushe]

Dungey says these two were "adolescents" drinking and smoking dope at the time.
by Adam Carter 12:09 PM

Terrible defence. Smoking weed doesn't make you oblivious to life.

EVERY TIME I read their response it elicits a very negative response in me. This is the murder of a young woman with her whole life ahead of her and Nights comments are disrespectful and just plain ignorant.

Same. Actually making me feel awful reading this garbage.

 

[Bluepopsicle]

Guessing you needed a new idol now that Charles Manson is dead?

ROFLMAO, that was funny!

 

[meterclicks]

Dungey says the jury can't give any weight to what he said. "Would you want your son convicted on that testimony?" Dungey fully shouts at the jury. "Would you convict your own family members on this evidence?"
by Adam Carter 12:17 PM

Dungey now turning to Cronin, who he says also used drugs. "What weight am I going to give to this evidence?" Dungey says.
by Adam Carter 12:18 PM

 

[Grey-St]

You have too much prejudice in you. You would never cut it as a judge or lawyer.

No one here is trying to be a judge, lawyer or jury member. We don't have to be held to the highest level of objectivity, but we do a good job of it.

But while we're on the topic thanks to you, you are one of the last people here to show any amount of objectivity or reasoning. All you show is obsession with and sympathy for the accused. So you wouldn't cut it, either.

 

[Jasper52]

Lisa Hepfner‏@HefCHCHNews

Why is he giving a statement now? Because he's getting some advantage, Dungey says. The police released him, which doesn't speak well for police, Dungey says. Cronin had heard news about #Smich and had conferred with other friends about the garage scene.

Dungey now describing what happens when people overdose. "It affects your memory." Yet the crown is relying upon evidence from this drug addict, Dungey says. The jury shouldn't give him weight. "Would you want your son convicted on that testimony?!!!" Thundering.

Would you convict your own family members on this evidence? You have to say yes to convict my client on this evidence. I ask you not to consider this evidence at all, Dungey says.

 

[redheart]

Thank you Jasper and meterclicks! :loveyou:

 

[meterclicks]

Dungey also saying the two men have two versions of what went on that night, and when Menses was asked to leave the garage.
by Adam Carter 12:20 PM

Dungey says this evidence isn't like there's a videotape, or a recording. Says the "blunt was being passed around and the music was going" at the time.
by Adam Carter 12:21 PM

 

[meterclicks]

Dungey again says the jury wouldn't convict a family member on evidence like this. "You just wouldn't do it. It's too weak, it's too frail."
by Adam Carter 12:22 PM

Dungey again says the presumption of innocence is on Smich.
by Adam Carter 12:23 PM

 

[Jasper52]

Lisa Hepfner‏@HefCHCHNews

Dungey was talking about witness Liberatore when he was getting into the overdoses, but says Cronin, another of #Smich's young clients, is also an addict with a long list of "occurrences" with police.

Mark always tells Marlena Meneses to leave. "She's never there to hear anything," Dungey says.

So how can the jury evaluate this evidence? They're drinking, smoking, passing a blunt, listening to music. "Yet you're asked to go in the jury room and come back with a conviction on this type of evidence!" Dungey suggests jurors wouldn't convict family members on this.

It's not for #Smich to prove his innocence, it's for the crown to prove his guilt. "Would you be sure on this evidence if it was a member of your family?" Dungey asks jury.

It comes down to a rap, Dungey says. Everyone says Mark raps. That's how he talks! Except Cronin. He didn't think #Smich was a rapper. "I have no idea where Cronin is coming from," Dungey says.

 

[Jasper52]

Can somebody please take over Lisa's tweets?

https://twitter.com/HefCHCHNews?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

 

[meterclicks]

Dungey now saying there was a third person in that garage at the time -- a James Lewis, who didn't testify. "He wasn't called by the Crown," Dungey says.
by Adam Carter 12:25 PM

"Shouldn't you have been able to have him on the stand?" Dungey asks.
by Adam Carter 12:26 PM

 

[Errrr]

The Crown basically handed this closing to Dungey! They must have something in their back pocket to reinforce the love triangle?! Otherwise I am still confused as to why they even tabled this “motive”?

I recall Abro saying it was the media that coined that motive? Did the Crown actually state that? It seems like an opportunistic thrill kill for both of them. That's what the crown said for TB despite the truck theft aspect of it.

 

[redheart]

Dungey now saying there was a third person in that garage at the time -- a James Lewis, who didn't testify. "He wasn't called by the Crown," Dungey says.
by Adam Carter 12:25 PM

"Shouldn't you have been able to have him on the stand?" Dungey asks.
by Adam Carter 12:26 PM

Ok, so why didn't you call him, Dungey?

 

[meterclicks]

Dungey is now moving to texts between Millard and Smich. He says they prove that Smich "had no involvement in the disappearance of Laura Babcock."
by Adam Carter 12:29 PM

In these texts, Smich says he's at 5 Maple Gate, Millard's home, on July 3, 2012. Dungey says that just because was he was there at the time, it doesn't mean he was involved.
by Adam Carter 12:30 PM

"Where's the connection?" Dungey asks. Says there's nothing in these texts to suggest that.
by Adam Carter 12:31 PM

 

[meterclicks]

Dungey says phone GPS evidence shows Smich at Maple Gate, not with Millard's phone and Laura Babcock's phone. "How does this involve him in an alleged crime?" Dungey says.
by Adam Carter 12:33 PM

Dungey again hammering home his suggestion that Smich did not go with Millard at any point to meet Laura Babcock.
by Adam Carter 12:34 PM

 

[JuneBug67]

Ok, so why didn't you call him, Dungey?

It's in line with his point that it's not the defense's burden to prove innocence.

 

[Typhoo1961]

Ok, so why didn't you call him, Dungey?

During the trial the Crown goes first so the Crown calls the witnesses first. The Crown did not call this one.
The defense lawyers have to go by what the Crown does.