Motion to Take Deposition to Perpetuate Testimony of Jill Kerley

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
JBean said:
IMO, capable of hurting a small child is quite a leap and I disagree completely. I think the defense is pretty clear that their motivation is only to raise the red flag as to why he wasn't investigated, which will create doubt regarding the investigation by LE.
You are on a slippery slope nts, because Kronk is not on trial here and your statements about him being a liar are no more founded than saying that JK is a liar. none of us have any clue at all and am trying to steer the conversation away from those kinds of conclusions and blanket statements when we have no evidence that either person is lying. We have no idea at all at this point.

Establishing that the body wasn't there in August would have nothing to to do with this testimony and is best left to the experts and should be debated in another thread.
Click to expand...

Thanks Jbean. I removed the post. Sorry bout that.
 
LambChop said:
Body language communicates 50% or more of what you have to say. This is what is so great about videos....it's right there in front of you and you can judge for yourself. Hard to do when it is in writing. And I agree with you. This matter will probably never get pass the judge.


http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/lying/detecting_lies.htm
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily agree with that and I am glad that we are not judged legally by our body language. Those are some pretty strong accusations and conclusions to be based upon body language. Hopefully that is not admissible in a court of law LOL!skeery

My only point is that if we are up in arms about calling Roy Kronk a liar we should be equally up in arms about calling Jill Kerley a liar because we don't have enough evidence or data on any of this to draw reasonable conclusions, imo. good for the goose good for the gander and all that.
 
JBean said:
I don't necessarily agree with that and I am glad that we are not judged legally by our body language. Those are some pretty strong accusations and conclusions to be based upon body language. Hopefully that is not admissible in a court of law LOL!skeery

My only point is that if we are up in arms about calling Roy Kronk a liar we should be equally up in arms about calling Jill Kerley a liar because we don't have enough evidence or data on any of this to draw reasonable conclusions, imo. good for the goose good for the gander and all that.
Click to expand...

Exactly and we have only seen a pretty much laid back Roy so he could have a point where his buttons could be pushed. This is true of anyone. But JK has made a very damning statement against another person with nothing to back it up. This was last November and there has been no follow-up documentation to prove what she stated. No hospital report, no police reports, no reports from relatives. As I said, you have to feel sorry for someone who has held a grudge against an ex for that long. He apparently has moved on, she's stuck in 1993 and still angry.


LOL. Whether we like it or not most people read that body language and use it to their advantage. And those juror's will use it, too. They just will not be scientific about it. JMO
 
LambChop said:
Exactly and we have only seen a pretty much laid back Roy so he could have a point where his buttons could be pushed. This is true of anyone. But JK has made a very damning statement against another person with nothing to back it up. This was last November and there has been no follow-up documentation to prove what she stated. No hospital report, no police reports, no reports from relatives. As I said, you have to feel sorry for someone who has held a grudge against an ex for that long. He apparently has moved on, she's stuck in 1993 and still angry.


LOL. Whether we like it or not most people read that body language and use it to their advantage. And those juror's will use it, too. They just will not be scientific about it. JMO
Click to expand...
Maybe he has moved on because he is guilty of abuse and she has not moved on because she was abused.Or perhaps it is as you say. How can we know? we can't at this point.
has anyone requested follow up reports or hospital information? Is she required to back it up or is the accusation all that is necessary at this juncture for this motion? Does she have it if it is required? IMO, if it is allowed then perhaps she will have to substantiate. if it is not allowed no one is going to bother.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe Jill Kerley nor do i believe Roy Kronk. I don't beleive either of them because there is not enough information form either to do so. I am only trying to look at the information provided in an objective way. the different scenarios to speculate on the merits of each of their stories are endless because we have no documentation from either thus no true conclusion can be drawn. We are all guessing at something with only bits and pieces of info.
 
rhornsby said:
If a tape of the interview is in the State's possession, then yes it could be requested by a public records request.
Click to expand...
Well, seeing that it hasn't been seen/heard by the public...then perhaps Baez hasn't handed it over yet, correct? Funny how he "leaked" parts of this to the media before the State ever got a look-see, huh? You'd think that if this amounted to ANYTHING he would have handled this more appropriately. I mean, he is the one who is requesting a change of venue because of that whole "tainting the jury pool" issue.
 
JBean said:
I don't necessarily agree with that and I am glad that we are not judged legally by our body language. Those are some pretty strong accusations and conclusions to be based upon body language. Hopefully that is not admissible in a court of law LOL!skeery

My only point is that if we are up in arms about calling Roy Kronk a liar we should be equally up in arms about calling Jill Kerley a liar because we don't have enough evidence or data on any of this to draw reasonable conclusions, imo. good for the goose good for the gander and all that.
Click to expand...
One was trying to do the right thing...the other?

...and I agree with you...this is about the LE's investigation.
 
I wonder if JK has been in a relationship since RK? Would SA be looking into that since she accused RK of abusing her? I would think if she has had a successful relationship since 1993 someone would have spoken up on her behalf by now. JMO

Not sure about this but I know my son played "Dungeon and Dragons" around that time and he played on a video not internet.
 
LambChop said:
I wonder if JK has been in a relationship since RK? Would SA be looking into that since she accused RK of abusing her? I would think if she has had a successful relationship since 1993 someone would have spoken up on her behalf by now. JMO

Not sure about this but I know my son played "Dungeon and Dragons" around that time and he played on a video not internet.
Click to expand...
Perhaps she has had another relationship. Here are her aliases:
http://www.ussearch.com/consumer/pr...71008148&adsource=95&TID=2&searchtab=criminal
 
JK is just vengeful, it will be interesting to see how her testimony "under oath" plays out. She is ridiculous, and with her criminal record (similar to Casey's), her testimony is useless for the defense. They should have done more research on their 'witness' before making it public. That said, this bears well for the prosecution, anything JK says will be stamped out quickly. DONE!
 
No way in the world they were ever going to try the check fraud trial and have Amy on the stand...so this has been a attempt at distraction, I do not think the defense has any hope of calling this witness ( thus the release of the tapes to the morning shows rather than putting them in discovery and adding her name to their witness list )....and let's not forget they simultaneously are trying to say Roy may have done it....while they are still fighting for more of Jesse's phone records. It is going to look like pin the tale on the other dude...none of whom go by the name of Zenaida Fernandez- Gonzalez, are half black-half, gorgeous with straight black hair and straight white teeth or are perfect tens. Andrea explains in her lectures that this is SOP, she will file as many motions as possible....all roads lead to appeal.[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX-0bfuneak[/ame]
Never, ever, ever in all of her photos, phone calls or texts that detail every second of Casey's life is there any connection to Mr. Kronk. Note even Dominc's lawyer opined the defense should look into an insanity defense.

You just can't make this stuff up!
 
Next thing you know they will say it was Hoover, and that is why he mysteriously showed up one day to volunteer for the family. It seems Roy was not the only one who knew or guessed that the body was there before it was found. Check this out: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iz1p2mI31O4[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_sEh-hVZcA[/ame]
It isn't going to matter what any ex says, in the words of Lee it is all just "popycock". Even Brad said that whatever may have happened in Kronk's personal life has nothing to do with the discovery of the remains. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY3HuVsPZss[/ame]

Does anyone know if anything further was filed with the court at five pm on Friday?

Who exactly has the defense deposed? Does anyone have a list?
 
Roy was just using the same common sense we all use.

The high school location would be the most likely.
 
Jk being an Trauma Nurse at a university. Does that mean she is an RN or has a four year degree? I was just wondering, why does she need to write bad checks and when the press says she has a criminal record, do they have the right JK? Moo
 
notthatsmart said:
Jk being an Trauma Nurse at a university. Does that mean she is an RN or has a four year degree? I was just wondering, why does she need to write bad checks and when the press says she has a criminal record, do they have the right JK? Moo
Click to expand...
Sure. if she has a criminal record then they can print that she does. Crikey why did winona ryder steal things? Just because someone may have the means doesn't mean they are honest and it doesn't mean they don't have problems of their own that end creating criminal behavior.
 
FF to minute 4:47

Mr. Baez is arguing that perhaps Tony was in the area where the remains were found. So, this assures me Kronk is just flavor of the month. It wont matter what any former wife says. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KUNZB-nCH4[/ame]
 
LambChop said:
When you look at JK's demeanor now and look at RK, I would conclude that RK was more of the victim. If JK was ever restrained it may have been RK's way of protecting himself. I would not doubt there was some violence in that home, just that it was not RK who was the offender. I believe he left because of it. JMO
Click to expand...

I keep thinking she and Cindy would probably be great friends!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 100 more.
Total: 2,975 (members: 101, guests: 2,874)

Online statistics

Members online
101
Guests online
2,874
Total visitors
2,975
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,714
Messages
18,145,654
Members
231,503
Latest member
PKBB
Back
Top