Roselvr: Let me clarify a few things, because I feel like you may be perceiving me as not only unfamiliar with the case, but hostile to JH's alleged drug use.
First off, I AM new to Websleuths, yes, so new in fact that I'm still learning the ins and outs of the community. That said, I am *not* new to the Jessica Heeringa case, am local to the area and am extremely familiar with the details of the case by research, the specifics of the information by geography, and the rumor mill by proximity. Understand that when i say "rumor mill" I'm referring to Facebook and locally, not Websleuths. I credit rumor as something for merit-based consideration but not on the same level as objective facts. There is *always* reason for rumors, but that doesn't always make them true. As with anything, there are degrees of truth, a kernel, a sliver, a vein, a streak, a nugget, a shadow, something more. There may be beef between them, it may be that she had a problem with JH dumping her brother, or that she never liked her to begin with, or she is hostile to drug users, or something, but it's ultimately inconsequential to the case other than something for an attorney to construct a flimsy defense from. I don't see how Dakotah benefits from discussing the fact that he and JH were heroin users and had fights over it. The biggest problem with the drug use is that it turned others into suspects and diverted suspicion from the serial freak who is really responsible.
Second, I don't have a real problem with heroin ab/use. I consider it a personal issue, unfortunate to the point of tragedy, because I know that it has not only an expense, but a personal cost, and can be terribly destructive. It may even be that she was stealing to support a habit. There's nothing to support that, but that's the sort of two-sides-to-the-story element that makes rumors far less substantial. Ultimately, I consider it a flimsy defense and the best the attorney can offer with what he's given.
All that said, we are dealing with public defenders in Hosticka and Mathis here. They are not high-powered highly paid attorneys, but just public defenders. It is their job, their requirement under law to ensure that Willis gets the fairest trial he can get. To my understanding, there is nothing in that job description that *requires* destroying the credibility of victims or other witnesses. They already have a tall order given the evidence against him, for the child *advertiser censored*, MJN and RBK.. It may be that there's not enough to get him for JH, but it's not going to fail because she may or may not have used heroin, or because a coworker thought she was stealing.
First off, I AM new to Websleuths, yes, so new in fact that I'm still learning the ins and outs of the community. That said, I am *not* new to the Jessica Heeringa case, am local to the area and am extremely familiar with the details of the case by research, the specifics of the information by geography, and the rumor mill by proximity. Understand that when i say "rumor mill" I'm referring to Facebook and locally, not Websleuths. I credit rumor as something for merit-based consideration but not on the same level as objective facts. There is *always* reason for rumors, but that doesn't always make them true. As with anything, there are degrees of truth, a kernel, a sliver, a vein, a streak, a nugget, a shadow, something more. There may be beef between them, it may be that she had a problem with JH dumping her brother, or that she never liked her to begin with, or she is hostile to drug users, or something, but it's ultimately inconsequential to the case other than something for an attorney to construct a flimsy defense from. I don't see how Dakotah benefits from discussing the fact that he and JH were heroin users and had fights over it. The biggest problem with the drug use is that it turned others into suspects and diverted suspicion from the serial freak who is really responsible.
Second, I don't have a real problem with heroin ab/use. I consider it a personal issue, unfortunate to the point of tragedy, because I know that it has not only an expense, but a personal cost, and can be terribly destructive. It may even be that she was stealing to support a habit. There's nothing to support that, but that's the sort of two-sides-to-the-story element that makes rumors far less substantial. Ultimately, I consider it a flimsy defense and the best the attorney can offer with what he's given.
All that said, we are dealing with public defenders in Hosticka and Mathis here. They are not high-powered highly paid attorneys, but just public defenders. It is their job, their requirement under law to ensure that Willis gets the fairest trial he can get. To my understanding, there is nothing in that job description that *requires* destroying the credibility of victims or other witnesses. They already have a tall order given the evidence against him, for the child *advertiser censored*, MJN and RBK.. It may be that there's not enough to get him for JH, but it's not going to fail because she may or may not have used heroin, or because a coworker thought she was stealing.
