GUILTY NC - Jameson 'Jamie' Hahn, 29, stabbed to death, Raleigh, 22 April 201

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

As I said before, we here at WS and the courtroom gallery, with a few exceptions, can turn it off, or turn it down, wear earplugs and read a book, or walk out. The judge (and it may not be his 1st time with this guy), the ADA, Morse, the clerk, the Deputies, the court reporter (and she really has to listen, bless 'er), a few more, and the poor jury are captive and must listen. And the jurors can't even complain about him to each other -- until they get into deliberation, and I'll bet they let it fly....

Anyway, we're fortunate. I got a lot of work done around the house -- a sure sign something is very wrong with what's happening in the courtroom.
 
Ok, so a question for anyone who has paid attention...

It seems like JB's last interaction with Orbitz was to cancel the Vegas flight from Charlotte, but he kept his train reservation to Charlotte for Tuesday 4/23 morning at 6:45am. (So he was gonna kill them Monday during the night, IMO, then take the early train to Charlotte.)

Did I get that right? Maybe he was going to rebook the flight to Vegas Monday night before or after killing them.
 
Planned to kill himself, huh? What about the Charlotte or the Vegas trip? Even if he cancelled, he would still have a credit. What about the questions about where he could go out of the country without a passport? Suicide, my toenail.

I'll tell him where he should go -- a sweet deal, too -- free living accommodations, free food, free clothes, free utilities, good security system, free medical care, transportation provided when he has (not wants) to go somewhere, job and education opportunities, a library, church services; it's kind of like one of those time shares -- there's a lot of different locations you could be transferred to live -- the coast, the piedmont, the mountains -- all the comforts of home -- for the rest of your life!
 
Just caught up on Det. Morse's testimony. The google searches are un-freaking-believable! JB is cold-blooded. Between the knife, the travel plans, and the google searches, there's no question in my mind he had it planned out. On top of that, everyone knows that he is a liar to begin with, so why believe him now?

Any guesses as to the identity of the defense's witness? I read there would be at least one. Someone on twitter said they heard JB might take the stand. With a narcissistic attention-seeker like JB, it actually wouldn't surprise me.

Also, can anyone fill me in on the objection that set Arbour off during Morse's cross? I missed it somehow, and it seemed to send him over the edge. As if things could be any worse with him.
 
Tedanddix said:
Just caught up on Det. Morse's testimony. The google searches are un-freaking-believable! JB is cold-blooded. Between the knife, the travel plans, and the google searches, there's no question in my mind he had it planned out. On top of that, everyone knows that he is a liar to begin with, so why believe him now?

Any guesses as to the identity of the defense's witness? I read there would be at least one. Someone on twitter said they heard JB might take the stand. With a narcissistic attention-seeker like JB, it actually wouldn't surprise me.

Also, can anyone fill me in on the objection that set Arbour off during Morse's cross? I missed it somehow, and it seemed to send him over the edge. As if things could be any worse with him.
Click to expand...

It happened very quickly. He asked the detective something about whether he would change anything about the reports or the investigation and the detective said no. Then he took a disappointed tone. He asked another question and it was sustained, and I think it was due to lack of foundation. So, he then says, Okay then, let's do it this way then, as if he were annoyed. Then he begins to go through all the detective's education and training. I didn't entirely understand where he was going and why it was necessary. Maybe others did and they can supplement this.
 
Prancy said:
It happened very quickly. He asked the detective something about whether he would change anything about the reports or the investigation and the detective said no. Then he took a disappointed tone. He asked another question and it was sustained, and I think it was due to lack of foundation. So, he then says, Okay then, let's do it this way then, as if he were annoyed. Then he begins to go through all the detective's education and training. I didn't entirely understand where he was going and why it was necessary. Maybe others did and they can supplement this.
Click to expand...

Just thought it was weird that he initially said he wasn't going to go through education/experience (he may have said what a detectives duties are), then after that objection, he did exactly that. Seemed like it was meant to piss everyone off.

Are they really suggesting JB tried to hurt himself before hurting JH???
 
I don't know. I don't recall if the state asked NH if he observed any injuries on the defendant when he came down the stairs. I don't think it's believable though, because with Jamie would have ran out if the defendant was harming himself. However, if the defendant says he did, then they can call NH back on Rebuttal.

I'm not sure how much more there is to cross of this witness. I will be interested to see how this defense attorney conducts his direct examination. He won't be able to talk this way on Direct and will have to use open ended questions then.
 
Holy cow...requesting mistrial and recusal of the judge! Saying judge is predujiced. This dude's a piece of work.
 
Does anyone know what the defense is contesting about the hospital interview of the defendant? It sounds like he was read his Miranda rights. He was not threatened or coerced to speak with the detectives. He did it voluntarily. What's the contention? Do they just not like that what the defendant said was harmful to his case? That's just how it goes sometimes.

I was thinking that the defendant might testify, but now, I'm not so sure. Does the defense have a mental health care professional in line to testify?

I wonder if the defense will make an offer of proof, since he was not able to get in the evidence he wanted. Maybe, I missed it. My feed was messing up.
 
Prancy said:
Does anyone know what the defense is contesting about the hospital interview of the defendant? It sounds like he was read his Miranda rights. He was not threatened or coerced to speak with the detectives. He did it voluntarily. What's the contention? Do they just not like that what the defendant said was harmful to his case? That's just how it goes sometimes.

I was thinking that the defendant might testify, but now, I'm not so sure. Does the defense have a mental health care professional in line to testify?
Click to expand...

I haven't been watching today, so not sure what the issue was with the interviews. I've just been getting updated on twitter and from friends. Does anyone know if these motions could become an issue at a later date? Like in the appeals process? I don't know much of anything about this sort of thing.

A mental health care professional is a distinct possibility. Not sure what they'd say that would be helpful, but I guess they need to make their "he snapped" case. It's gonna kill me to wait all weekend to find out!
 
I don't know what all this is about. I didn't hear the original debate about the admission of all three interviews. Obviously Arbour wants the two other interviews admitted. I don't know why they aren't. It leaves the jury wondering what they're not allowed to hear. I'm wondering as well.

I'm wondering if there is something derogatory or humiliating about the victims in the other two interviews. Because Arbour has been asking bizarre questions (eg the bathroom) all along. There seems to be something underlying. Or Arbour is just trying to make the jury think there is.
 
Just blew in.... Have I missed anything worthwhile? Is Arbour scoring any points?
 
borndem, much drama transpired. Arbour requested mistrial and for judge to recuse himself. Denied.
 
Someone just told me Arbour just mentioned some sort of "love triangle" - anyone catch what that was about?
 
Jury's gotta be wondering "what are they keeping from us?"
 
Just getting here, I know, but it sounds to me with the cross of Morse that Arbour is effectively getting a backhanded type of testimony from Broyhill through the questions he's asking Morse.... "Did you ask him if he --- whatever --- ?" "Did he answer?" So we may not hear from Broyhill even though we don't know what JB said. We'll see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 141 more.
Total: 1,717 (members: 142, guests: 1,575)

Online statistics

Members online
142
Guests online
1,575
Total visitors
1,717
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,385
Messages
18,202,934
Members
233,834
Latest member
rpond1972
Back
Top