GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #1

[emmalpage81]

http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...-was-violent-or-a-heavy-drinker-34355748.html
Her is the link to her interview in which she talks about the phone call. I can't see how Abc would have got it unless it was passed on by either the Martens themselves or the legal team

The ABC video clip suggests that the Martens family had shared it with them (ABC News). To be honest their actions seem to get more bizarre as weeks go on; I wouldn't put anything past them.

 

[wildebeest]

The voice on the phone call does not sound like a child.

IMHO

 

[emmalpage81]

It seems ABC has edited the video and cut out the portion of the child's voicemail. Interesting. I wonder if they will elaborate on why.

 

[Deleted member 165489]

My guess: threat of legal action over misrepresenting the actions of an orphan whose Dad was murdered in their country by one of their citizens! imo

It seems ABC has edited the video and cut out the portion of the child's voicemail. Interesting. I wonder if they will elaborate on why.

 

[searchinGirl]

I was not looking it as a possible defence for her, more like a description.. something to tie all anomalies together. Jason's sister is reported as saying she was really surprised to learn, at their wedding, that Molly had told several people that Mags, Jason's first wife, was her penpal, when in actual fact she had never even known her.
So there was some embroidering going on there for some strange reason.
It could be as Frizby, I think said that she had to get outa town fast in 2006, following some 'escapade', and its possible this was a story she used to excuse her fast departure to those who knew her.
Seemingly pointless lies, no gain to be made from them at all.. yet that was what she presented to some people..

Therein lies the rub Kitty...if you describe her with multiple personality disorder to tie the anomalies together, then you are describing a person who is legally insane...one who isn't competent to stand trial...

 

[emmalpage81]

My guess: threat of legal action over misrepresenting the actions of an orphan whose Dad was murdered in their country by one of their citizens! imo

Absolutely. It must be rather embarrassing for them that the family are stating it is not J. You would have thought they would have tried to corroborate it before broadcasting.

 

[kittythehare]

i am of the belief that it may have been played or released in the courtroom. the only advantage I would think it could have to them is if it was released or played in order to show she has been receiving crank calls etc and being allegedly intimidated. Its all in how it is interpreted and the media is selective in what it releases as well. It would be a bizarre move if their stellar legal team release a recording and say it was Jack calling her when only last month they said she had recieved a crank call from a child and that they knew it was not him. If it was indeed believed to be a genuine call from Jack, the press would have jumped on it I reckon and the martens would most likely have released statements saying they knew the kids missed molly and would not stop til they regained custody etc etc....

It was not released in open court. The ABC producers gave the impression they were broadcasting from a really busy courtroom, interviewing very busy Martens' lawyers, 2, not just 1 and no attempt at balance. But the managed to actually state the tape was presented to them by the family, the Martens family.
so we get Daddy's lawyer stating daddy should really not be here, once again the implication is clear, Daddy and former fed do not really belong in a court as a crimnal.
Molly's lawyer reiterated her 'love and dedication as a mother and just happened to slip in via faux confidential sycophantic 'slip' that in actual fact she is so much more distressed by the loss of the children than her forthcoming trial for murder. who knew??
Then they threw the tape in, in full knowledge that they were part of a stitch up extraordinaire and were determined to go ahead with it, despite the actual situation.
This smashes all standards in journalism, and suggests some 'pressure' was brought to bear on this particular media outlet who prefer showing nauseating clips of chickens and kittens being born as per their regular offering to the audience they court. Worth searching under reliable accurate journalism and political influences.
It suggests dirty tactics and a very expensive pr stunt which has gone belly up under threat of litigation

 

[kittythehare]

Therein lies the rub Kitty...if you describe her with multiple personality disorder to tie the anomalies together, then you are describing a person who is legally insane...one who isn't competent to stand trial...

I could not care in the slightest whether or not she is stir crazy, there are 22 years missing from the life of a murder suspect.
Under what circumstances can this situation arise?

 

[searchinGirl]

I could not care in the slightest whether or not she is stir crazy, there are 22 years missing from the life of a murder suspect.
Under what circumstances can this situation arise?

22 years?

 

[Marshleon]

I heard the tape purporting to be from Jack Corbett (according to ABC) and the caller spoke with a Dublin accent with an American 'Twang'. I'm from Dublin so recognised the accent (particularly when he said the word 'hard'). The Corbett children as we know are from Limerick, a different accent from us 'Dubs'. Any linguistic expert would recognise that it was not a Limerick accent and maybe this is one of the reasons the recording was pulled. I still cannot understand ABC posting it without verification that it was in fact Jack's voice.

MM has no-one but herself to blame in relation to crank calls as she has her phone number and email address plastered all over her FB page. To drag an innocent child into this is reprehensible and not the actions of a 'loving mother' and I'm surprised her legal team did not point out to her that voice analyses can be carried out and also phone records are easily checked. IMO she (and her legal team) are trying to create a Media Circus and lead to a case of 'not seeing the wood for the trees' thereby creating doubt etc with the eventual jury. It is (again) the Autopsy Report that will provide the evidence, the Autopsy Report does NOT lie. MM and TM will fall on their own swords, swords of their own creation.

 

[stmarysmead]

The post on Justice for Jason today with all the mugshots really brought home something that needs to be emphasizied, in my opinion. The Martens seem to want to impress people with the fact that they are a law enforcement family.

So let's see.

There's a law against drunk driving. But when the Marten's son wants to drink and drive drunk with his kids in the car, law doesn't matter.

There's a law against writing bad checks, essentially stealing by fraud. But when the Marten's niece wants to have things she can't afford, that law against stealing with bad checks doesn't matter.

There's a law against murder, but when Molly wants a man's children and his money, that law does t matter either.
Anyway, in my opinion, that's how this looks to me.

They better go easy on their sterling reputations as law enforcement, when the family seems to have little respect for the law when it suits them. My little ole opinion only, of course.

Let's see how it plays out in criminal AND civil court.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[searchinGirl]

I'm no psychologist but if I were to venture a guess as to what else might explain Molly's angry outbursts and lying fantasy stories it would be Borderline Personality... and she might have Narcissism too...but I think she probably is bipolar from what I know about it...

 

[Electric Sheep]

MM has no-one but herself to blame in relation to crank calls as she has her phone number and email address plastered all over her FB page.

I disagree. The person who made the crank call is the only one responsible for the crank call.

 

[kittythehare]

The post on Justice for Jason today with all the mugshots really brought home something that needs to be emphasizied, in my opinion. The Martens seem to want to impress people with the fact that they are a law enforcement family.

So let's see.

There's a law against drunk driving. But when the Marten's son wants to drink and drive drunk with his kids in the car, law doesn't matter.

There's a law against writing bad checks, essentially stealing by fraud. But when the Marten's niece wants to have things she can't afford, that law against stealing with bad checks doesn't matter.

There's a law against murder, but when Molly wants a man's children and his money, that law does t matter either.
Anyway, in my opinion, that's how this looks to me.

They better go easy on their sterling reputations as law enforcement, when the family seems to have little respect for the law when it suits them. My little ole opinion only, of course.

Let's see how it plays out in criminal AND civil court.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There are laws about harassment, slander, misleading media,incitement, provocation, breaking of court orders by proxy too and these are all currently playing out and flagrantly broken to no apparent counter action at all.
The very fact that ABC news ran that item, several days after the hearing and without validating sources or providing the balance expected by including at least 1 prosecutor in the interview is obscenely outrageous.
A stunt like that has the capability of causing widespread fear for the guardians and it places the childrens' lives under further unwelcome scrutiny.

Its utterly extraordinary.

Source of this interview and all relevant details surrounding the clip need to be placed under close inspection by the courts and by law enforcement. Its a very serious violation.

 

[kittythehare]

I disagree. The person who made the crank call is the only one responsible for the crank call.

Well it certainly was not presented by ABC as being a crank call. It was presented as a message Molly had received from her 'step-son'. Either that or ABC made up the bit about the stepson??

 

[Electric Sheep]

Well it certainly was not presented by ABC as being a crank call. It was presented as a message Molly had received from her 'step-son'. Either that or ABC made up the bit about the stepson??

I was not the one who described it as a crank call, I was replying to the person who did. If indeed it was a crank call, the person who made it is to blame, not the receiver.

 

[stmarysmead]

It was not released in open court. The ABC producers gave the impression they were broadcasting from a really busy courtroom, interviewing very busy Martens' lawyers, 2, not just 1 and no attempt at balance. But the managed to actually state the tape was presented to them by the family, the Martens family.
so we get Daddy's lawyer stating daddy should really not be here, once again the implication is clear, Daddy and former fed do not really belong in a court as a crimnal.
Molly's lawyer reiterated her 'love and dedication as a mother and just happened to slip in via faux confidential sycophantic 'slip' that in actual fact she is so much more distressed by the loss of the children than her forthcoming trial for murder. who knew??
Then they threw the tape in, in full knowledge that they were part of a stitch up extraordinaire and were determined to go ahead with it, despite the actual situation.
This smashes all standards in journalism, and suggests some 'pressure' was brought to bear on this particular media outlet who prefer showing nauseating clips of chickens and kittens being born as per their regular offering to the audience they court. Worth searching under reliable accurate journalism and political influences.
It suggests dirty tactics and a very expensive pr stunt which has gone belly up under threat of litigation

On March 13, ESPN 30 for 30 will run a documentary on the notorious media hoax, the Duke Lacrosse "rape" case.

Our media, if it can find a sensational case that it can use to push a metanarrative they cherish...whether it's true or not...will twist, omit facts, cut sentences, delete videos to change their meaning. They think they are helping society and don't care about what's true or who gets hurt.

In this case, if they decide they want to educate the public on domestic violence, you can be sure that an attractive blonde, whose heart is breaking for her babies, might just suit their purposes. It won't matter to our media if Jason never laid a hand on her. As it was said it the Duke Hoax, "it's not about the truth." It's about an agenda...the real people being hurt are nothing to our media.

The fact that Molly's father and uncle are middle managers in the FBI is not the danger here. The danger is our media...always trying to find a way to push agendas. No need to wait for one that really is the truth.

Someone at ABC wants to push the domestic violence issue. Who cares if Molly is a liar or those kids suffer from their Dad being falsely vilified? ABC would think they were helping "educate" our society.

This is rampant here. Take any "righteous" story from our media with much skepticism. Most of us do.

My opinion only.

 

[kittythehare]

On March 13, ESPN 30 for 30 will run a documentary on the notorious media hoax, the Duke Lacrosse "rape" case.

Our media, if it can find a sensational case that it can use to push a metanarrative they cherish...whether it's true or not...will twist, omit facts, cut sentences, delete videos to change their meaning. They think they are helping society and don't care about what's true or who gets hurt.

In this case, if they decide they want to educate the public on domestic violence, you can be sure that an attractive blonde, whose heart is breaking for her babies, might just suit their purposes. It won't matter to our media if Jason never laid a hand on her. As it was said it the Duke Hoax, "it's not about the truth." It's about an agenda...the real people being hurt are nothing to our media.

The fact that Molly's father and uncle are middle managers in the FBI is not the danger here. The danger is our media...always trying to find a way to push agendas. No need to wait for one that really is the truth.

Someone at ABC wants to push the domestic violence issue. Who cares if Molly is a liar or those kids suffer from their Dad being falsely vilified? ABC would think they were helping "educate" our society.

This is rampant here. Take any "righteous" story from our media with much skepticism. Most of us do.

My opinion only.

I still think they had a 'helping hand' in this particular instance.

 

[stmarysmead]

Molly and her FBI parents are aware of the potency of our Media when they take a side in a case. It may well be that sitting in Jason's bedroom, looking at the man they slaughtered...they realized that they had one real path to victory, to getting everything they want.

Our media.

That's the campaign they are running. It's geared to engage the American media...it's a made-for-TV movie. So far, they have had limited luck. But now...this ABC report makes me believe that they finally are realizing their goal. Everything you wrote about the falsity of this ABC report is right on the Mark, Kitty, but it could be just the beginning.

Oh, the things they do!

They may do interviews of Molly crying, clutching the children's pictures, breaking viewers hearts, followed by interviews from "specialists" in domestic abuse. They will start to mention how big a man Jason was, how small she is...how frail her Father is...and have other experts speak on camera about this syndrome or that syndrome that years of abuse will bring on.

Little Molly...how she has suffered...

The Martens have been "marketing" this angle for months. Now they have snagged a little media interest. Let me tell you, until you have seen it, you can't believe how our media can slant a case. It's always about a "good cause." Don't we ALL want to stop domestic violence?

This is my greatest fear. Her family are nobodies. But the press here is powerful and cares little about the truth.

Molly and Daddy know this as well as I do.

My opinion only.

 

[kittythehare]

Molly and her FBI parents are aware of the potency of our Media when they take a side in a case. It may well be that sitting in Jason's bedroom, looking at the man they slaughtered...they realized that they had one real path to victory, to getting everything they want.

Our media.

That's the campaign they are running. It's geared to engage the American media...it's a made-for-TV movie. So far, they have had limited luck. But now...this ABC report makes me believe that they finally are realizing their goal. Everything you wrote about the falsity of this ABC report is right on the Mark, Kitty, but it could be just the beginning.

Oh, the things they do!

They may do interviews of Molly crying, clutching the children's pictures, breaking viewers hearts, followed by interviews from "specialists" in domestic abuse. They will start to mention how big a man Jason was, how small she is...how frail her Father is...and have other experts speak on camera about this syndrome or that syndrome that years of abuse will bring on.

Little Molly...how she has suffered...

The Martens have been "marketing" this angle for months. Now they have snagged a little media interest. Let me tell you, until you have seen it, you can't believe how our media can slant a case. It's always about a "good cause." Don't we ALL want to stop domestic violence?

This is my greatest fear. Her family are nobodies. But the press here is powerful and cares little about the truth.

Molly and Daddy know this as well as I do.

My opinion only.

absolutely!
But I wonder whether ABC was put under any 'pressure' to run this old story with the tape.. It was a very badly edited piece.. We know the feds are not co-operating with the local police or they would have handed the work records over immediately without the necessity of the prosecution to obtain a court order, costing valuable time.

Again, the actual trial could be a long way off yet so media are reluctant to run stories so early in a process. There are many angles media could take in relation to the autopsy by inviting expert witnesses to comment, but unsure whether that can take place at this point in time?