MISTRIAL - Sidney Moorer on trial for the kidnapping of Heather Elvis #4

[TTF14]

I may have missed this, but is it confirmed that the friend of KT was the foreman and one of the NG's?

NO. It has not been confirmed.

 

[Hatfield]

I may have missed this, but is it confirmed that the friend of KT was the foreman and one of the NG's?

I don't think it has come out yet but I am going to take a guess that one of the 2 that voted for NG will be him. I will be very surprised if he wasn't one of them. And adding to that I will be very upset if he was one of them.

It really is ridiculous.
-Judge himself has personal ties to Moorer family
-one of the jury members is a friend of Moorer's attorney

WTH?
Judge should have recused himself long ago and then I bet that juror would have not made the jury. Grrrrrr

 

[nerdgirl]

Speaking after Judge Markley Dennis declared a mistrial in the case, jury foreman Fred Lang said the prosecution's case was largely based on circumstantial evidence, making the jury's job difficult.

"There were so many what ifs. What if this happened? What if that happened? Things of that nature," he said. "Even though the state was saying that there was a possibility of him being there, of him doing this, there was no concrete evidence of the fact it happened. We were questioning in our own mind: It could have been somebody else? We didn't do the what ifs."

Lang said the jurors got along, but both sides were convinced of their positions.

"The fact of the matter was we could not say this is the way it should be because we could not come to that consensus,” he said. “You have to be unanimous, 100 percent.”

http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/crime/article_0f1386d6-3a4f-11e6-a96a-cffb901d4c93.html

it’s up to Solicitor Jimmy Richardson whether the case will be tried again.

__

that's pretty sad, I believe the evidence putting SM there was THERE. What a shame. The jury should be ashamed.

So frustrated. I do think that the prosecution made it clear that they needed to vote G or NG for a kidnapping charge, based on the legal definition of kidnapping. Not whether SM was driving the truck or sitting in the passenger seat or whatever. Of course there are alot of what if's. But, based on the fact that 10 jurors voted Guilty, I would say the argument was made pretty well, it sounds like those 10 people knew what exactly they needed to make a decision about.
I think the prosecution was cut off before she could finish her closing statement, but at the same time, I think that she knew she was running out of time, and should have gotten her last visual in, especially considering that the judge seemed to be more harsh with her than the defense, IMO.
I also think that the other 2 jurors seemed to get more hung up on the things that we don't know than the things that we DO know, and also maybe they were already biased for reasons discussed earlier.
We don't know for sure who was driving the truck, but why do we care, for this charge?

 

[TTF14]

So frustrated. I do think that the prosecution made it clear that they needed to vote G or NG for a kidnapping charge, based on the legal definition of kidnapping. Not whether SM was driving the truck or sitting in the passenger seat or whatever. Of course that are alot of what if's. But, based on the fact that 10 jurors voted Guilty, I would say the argument was made pretty well, it sounds like those 10 people knew what exactly they needed to make a decision about.
I think the prosecution was cut off before she could finish her closing statement, but at the same time, I think that she knew she was running out of time, and should have gotten her last visual in, especially considering that the judge seemed to be more harsh with her than the defense, IMO.
I also think that the other 2 jurors seemed to get more hung up on the things that we don't know than the things that we DO know, and also maybe they were already biased for reasons discussed earlier.
We don't know for sure who was driving the truck, but why do we care, for this charge?

Very well said. My thoughts exactly.

 

[jillycat]

Jilly, what are your thoughts about Truslow's friend being on the jury?

While in theory, I don't think a relationship like that necessarily equals bias, I said, essentially, when this was reported that I think even the appearance of a conflict of interest or prejudice is a bad thing for a trial because in a case like what happened today, the parties on the other side and the public cannot help but ask if that's why. I also think that leaving it up to the juror to decide if a conflict exists or whether or not he or she can be impartial is not a proper method of selection. Maybe the person can be impartial, but jury selection is not supposed to be left to the public or prospective jurors or we'd all be choosing our buddies to hear cases.

I also think judges shaking hands with defendants is beyond stupid.

 

[bestill]

I have a question, what if one of the jurors was posting on facebook on June 21, how does that look? Are they not instructed to stay off of social media? And what if that person has a fb friend with the same last name as the victim who is most likely related?

 

[nerdgirl]

I don't think it has come out yet but I am going to take a guess that one of the 2 that voted for NG will be him. I will be very surprised if he wasn't one of them. And adding to that I will be very upset if he was one of them.

It really is ridiculous.
-Judge himself has personal ties to Moorer family
-one of the jury members is a friend of Moorer's attorney

WTH?
Judge should have recused himself long ago and then I bet that juror would have not made the jury. Grrrrrr

I agree with you.

 

[Unykorn&Reignbeaus]

I can't seem to find a pic or link or video to this.......can anyone point me in the right direction?? Please

[video=youtube;s674pHPNLng]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s674pHPNLng[/video][/video...

it is in the video now on you tube....
Sidney Moorer Trial Jury Instructions 6/23/16.... at approximately 27.12

 

[geevee]

I may have missed this, but is it confirmed that the friend of KT was the foreman and one of the NG's?

I believe the "we' in his statement is himself and the other NG voter, as all 10 others voted guilty, and although I have not found direct evidence myself that Mr. Lang is in fact the friend of KT, it has been widely reported to be so. I would like to know that 'concretely' though.

 

[Hatfield]

I typed a response and Safari crashed and I lost it, so I'm frustrated, but basically what I said is, this case has problems beyond the jury instructions. However, I do agree that education in general about how the system works is sorely lacking, and IMO that education needs to flow from a far more stringent civics foundation than currently exists in this country. By the time you're seated on a jury, you should not be still trying to wrap your head around the meaning of rules of evidence or standards for burden of proof. These are basic concepts that underpin how a court functions under a democratic system.

I totally agree.

 

[andalso]

I can't seem to find a pic or link or video to this.......can anyone point me in the right direction?? Please

https://twitter.com/courtchatter/media

Sorry, don't know how to bring actual pic here, but scroll down her photos (past cutest dog ever) and you will see it.

 

[pinkshoemama]

I know I missed the part of the conversation today where we express our frustration, anger, confusion & sadness so humor me while I jump in to simply say:

WTF.

Today's conclusion is just a huge punch to the gut.

We will still hold the faith for any & all types of justice for you, Heather. There is GUILT written ALL OVER this case & we all see it.

(Emotion off. Brain on, now &#128522.


Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[jellybeanz]

no doubt Bri was a great friend/roommate and wants SM to suffer but I have to admit I felt it strange w emphasis everyone was putting on HE possibly pregnant, then Bri testifying she saw no tampons, etc.....then on cross the starts with "spotting" then ultimately states "yes, she got her period". i think that would be stuck in my mind as a juror as a little deceptive
I am wondering why it was never addressed why a 2nd pregnancy test wasnt revealed. I dont think I know of anyone that is curious enough to take a test, then receive an error response, not take a 2nd test for accurate results. Maybe HE took a 2nd test and told Bri the results but it would now be considered hearsay

I took it that Bri was saying she never saw tampons when she and Heather were in the appt from beginning of November.
I could be wrong here, but I didnt think she said 'yes, she got her period'. I heard 'she told me she bled a little' and I gathered that this was taken from one of the phone calls Heather and Bri had on the week Heather was kidnapped and Bri was out of State. I felt Bri was hesitant to answer THAT question as she hadn't witnessed it in person and wasn't 100% sure Heather had had her full period. I dunno. Hope to be corrected if wrong.

 

[LBDunes]

I believe the "we' in his statement is himself and the other NG voter, as all 10 others voted guilty, and although I have not found direct evidence myself that Mr. Lang is in fact the friend of KT, it has been widely reported to be so. I would like to know that 'concretely' though.

I would like to know as well for my own curiousity. Although when you say widely reported, do you mean because people are saying it on facebook or because they are angry about the friend being on the jury? I haven't seen it in the media. I did see a clip with 2 of the jurors who were not the foreman and said the evidence was right there in front of them and 2 other they wouldn't agree. LOL so we know it wasn't these 2. The guy speaking sounded like he was very frustrated.

http://www.wmbfnews.com/clip/12550126/jurors-speak-about-split-on-verdict?clienttype=generic

 

[Carolina Girl]

I have seen it stated someone saw a juror in WalMart that said one hold out was KT friend. The other may have been swayed but not him.?

 

[pinkshoemama]

I have a question, what if one of the jurors was posting on facebook on June 21, how does that look? Are they not instructed to stay off of social media? And what if that person has a fb friend with the same last name as the victim who is most likely related?

I am thinking the judge didn't specify for them to stay off social media. If memory serves me correct, he never did say directly NOT to be on. He did ask they not research the case?

I'd love to be wrong though. Not that it matters at this point, sadly.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[TTF14]

Wonder if Tammy is drunk enough yet to start posting on social media about all of this.

 

[Hatfield]

I have seen it stated someone saw a juror in WalMart that said one hold out was KT friend. The other may have been swayed but not him.?

Thank You. I choose to believe this circumstantial evidence of the walkmart encounter (lol) and I agree if he was one of the holdouts then he was not going to budge. Which brings me to another conclusion. Once the judge saw the jury # then he also knew the guy was probably not going to budge and that is why he didn't make the jury keep going back to try more.

Grrrrrrrr (again)

This kind of crap of the judge's knowing the defendents family, shaking hands with defendant, and friends of the defendent's attorney being on the jury is just BS. It does affect the trial. In a big way I may add.

I think I need to get a drink and call it a night. Thanks everyone.

 

[jillycat]

So frustrated. I do think that the prosecution made it clear that they needed to vote G or NG for a kidnapping charge, based on the legal definition of kidnapping. Not whether SM was driving the truck or sitting in the passenger seat or whatever. Of course there are alot of what if's. But, based on the fact that 10 jurors voted Guilty, I would say the argument was made pretty well, it sounds like those 10 people knew what exactly they needed to make a decision about.
I think the prosecution was cut off before she could finish her closing statement, but at the same time, I think that she knew she was running out of time, and should have gotten her last visual in, especially considering that the judge seemed to be more harsh with her than the defense, IMO.
I also think that the other 2 jurors seemed to get more hung up on the things that we don't know than the things that we DO know, and also maybe they were already biased for reasons discussed earlier.
We don't know for sure who was driving the truck, but why do we care, for this charge?

I think they weren't concerned with where he was sitting, but questioned whether or not he was even in the truck.

I don't know how you separate the lure call and the truck. But my feeling is that the state should have spent as much time convincing that he was in the truck as they spent convincing that the headlights were coming from that truck.

 

[andalso]

Where do the searches for Heather stand?