GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #10

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Just reaffirms my belief that the Martens are cold calcuted murderers.They couldn't defend their actions so will try any imaginable technicality ave . And people are criticising these atteronys ? They have tried their hardest to get these two acquitted by any means .
 
An awful lot of straw clutching going on there. Evidence is evidence, TM walked them to a guilty verdict. But I suppose this is what defence lawyer do. Would have preferred if the jury had not spoken as candid as they did tho, never hear any jury over here talking about a trial.

http://www.journalnow.com/news/crim...al&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share
Very true. Very bad idea especially when the defence said they would be appealing. To be fair though, if I were on a jury and heading home every evening, I would be straight onto the Internet searching for info , human nature to be curious! I'm sure these jury members did the same. Still though, out come remains the same however the defence lawyers wouldn't be doing their jobs if they let it go. They will dig and dig now for anything. I did see comments from two if not three of the jurors on social media afterwards. Very unwise! Clearly the lawyers and their minions are trawling social media too!

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk
 
Oh dear.... Not surprised tbh, the defence will look for anything, any tiny indiscretion to try redeem themselves, the lawyers I mean , personally I thought jury members giving interviews straight after the verdict was not a good idea especially offering their personal views. But that seems to be the usual in the US. Is this a serious issue I wonder?

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

"contradicts the courts finding that molly corbett was not the aggressor"... (excerpt from above article. )I don't recall the court making a finding of that nature?? Or did I miss it?

Didn't the spatter expert indicate it was probable that blows took place on or near the bed? Surely it was hardly a major leap for the jury to surmise that JC was first struck while in bed?
 
Jury handed down verdict on Wednesday 9th August and 20/20 interview was Friday 11th. When were the jurors interviewed. Long enough after the verdict to have read all the media reports? Probably. And natural curiosity would send most people Googling I assume never mind the people who sat on that jury. Nevertheless this would not happen in Ireland as jurors are not allowed to talk to the media AFAIK. Never seen them be identified either.

Sent from my Hol-U19 using Tapatalk

Same in Australia. Jurors are never identified and cannot talk to the press.
 
How did they know the foreman had a meeting on Aug 8th in the car for 15 mins? Was he being followed? Hadn't deliberations begun at that stage so was he not entitled to discuss with another juror or is that not permitted outside jury room? I too felt it was a bad idea for the interviews, however, I'm sure this jury is no different to any other. It seems to me the rules expect jurors to be almost superhuman inorder to avoid every pitfall....
 
"contradicts the courts finding that molly corbett was not the aggressor"... (excerpt from above article. )I don't recall the court making a finding of that nature?? Or did I miss it?

Didn't the spatter expert indicate it was probable that blows took place on or near the bed? Surely it was hardly a major leap for the jury to surmise that JC was first struck while in bed?
Yeah I don't recall seeing that either about her not being the aggressor but as the brick paver seemed to not elaborated on too much, I don't believe it was Proven she used it only the assumption she did and that TM admitted doing a lot of damage with the bat so therefore they are claiming TM was the aggressor. I would think it's the commentary made online etc that has them riled, personal opinions and remarks that were nothing to do with the evidence presented. Just goes to show there's always someone watching what goes on on social media!

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk
 
How did they know the foreman had a meeting on Aug 8th in the car for 15 mins? Was he being followed? Hadn't deliberations begun at that stage so was he not entitled to discuss with another juror or is that not permitted outside jury room? I too felt it was a bad idea for the interviews, however, I'm sure this jury is no different to any other. It seems to me the rules expect jurors to be almost superhuman inorder to avoid every pitfall....
Which article was that in?

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk
 
Yeah I don't recall seeing that either about her not being the aggressor but as the brick paver seemed to not elaborated on too much, I don't believe it was Proven she used it only the assumption she did and that TM admitted doing a lot of damage with the bat so therefore they are claiming TM was the aggressor. I would think it's the commentary made online etc that has them riled, personal opinions and remarks that were nothing to do with the evidence presented. Just goes to show there's always someone watching what goes on on social media!

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

It's so maddening the way this defense team play with words and make statements like that which are blatantly untrue or Inaccurate at best. It's like they think if they say it often enough People will believe them.
 
How did they know the foreman had a meeting on Aug 8th in the car for 15 mins? Was he being followed? Hadn't deliberations begun at that stage so was he not entitled to discuss with another juror or is that not permitted outside jury room? I too felt it was a bad idea for the interviews, however, I'm sure this jury is no different to any other. It seems to me the rules expect jurors to be almost superhuman inorder to avoid every pitfall....

It is a small courthouse. Most people parked in a nearby parking garage. The jury, the press, TM, MM, and most likely attorneys were all parked in that garage.
 
attachment.php


I would say it would be logical to assume it was used a lot more than once
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5241.JPG
    IMG_5241.JPG
    75.2 KB · Views: 119
There were questions from Mm friends so I would say the were watching everything/ trying to help Molly get off on a technicality .
 
"contradicts the courts finding that molly corbett was not the aggressor"... (excerpt from above article. )I don't recall the court making a finding of that nature?? Or did I miss it?

Didn't the spatter expert indicate it was probable that blows took place on or near the bed? Surely it was hardly a major leap for the jury to surmise that JC was first struck while in bed?

And TM said under testimony that he knew nothing of the brick during the assault but the brick contained blood, hair and tissue. So when does he think that this brick was used. It just jumped up itself from the nightstand and whacked JC in the head.
 
attachment.php


I would say it would be logical to assume it was used
Yes sorry, worded that wrong. It was definitely used but not proven conclusively by whom nor what it was doing there. TM said he didn't but he could have been lying. They both may we have used it.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk
 
How did they know the foreman had a meeting on Aug 8th in the car for 15 mins? Was he being followed? Hadn't deliberations begun at that stage so was he not entitled to discuss with another juror or is that not permitted outside jury room? I too felt it was a bad idea for the interviews, however, I'm sure this jury is no different to any other. It seems to me the rules expect jurors to be almost superhuman inorder to avoid every pitfall....

Discussing the case is not permitted, discussing the weather is fine.
 
And TM said under testimony that he knew nothing of the brick during the assault but the brick contained blood, hair and tissue. So when does he think that this brick was used. It just jumped up itself from the nightstand and whacked JC in the head.

Exactly. Most of this is grasping at straws. I'm a bit worried about Perez comment re personalities but didn't some of the jury meet the corbett family at the hotel that night or next. The bi polar diagnosis prob came out then during those conversations. They prob just reinforced some jurors suspicions that something was amiss with MM.
 
According to court papers, Molly Corbett has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. But that was never presented to the jury,

So Molly lied at the custody hearing . We have it in black and white here


Molly Martens claims she has not been prescribed drugs for bipolar or depression in 'over eight years' according to court documents.

In a transcript of her testimony during a guardianship hearing on August 14th last year, the 32-year old told the court that she was diagnosed as bipolar at the age of 15.

Her testimony was given in response to evidence from her sister-in-law Tracey Lynch, who claimed that Ms Martens had left 'her lithium out on a shelf' in the bathroom while staying in Ms Lynch's home. The claims were made in court while both parties battled for custody of Mr Corbett's two young children.

While being examined under oath, Molly's attorney Kelley Gondring asked her what happened after she was diagnosed as bipolar. In reply she said "I underwent therapy and a psychiatrist for medications".

Mr Gondring then asked: "and today, what, if any, medications do you take for being bipolar?"

Ms Martens replied: "I don't"

Q - When is the last time you saw anyone about being bipolar?

A - The last time I saw anyone for bipolar depression was around age 17. And probably the last time I say anyone for depression was eight or nine years ago.

Q - Why haven't you seen anybody for bipolar since you were 17?

A - I feel that I probably wasn't bipolar. I was given anti-depressants and they reacted physiologically with my body. So later on the diagnosis changed to depression.

Q - Okay, when have you been prescribed lithium?

A - Not for over..... It's been over eight years since I have been prescribed anything.

Q - When, if ever, would you have had a box of lithium?

A - I have never had a box of lithium


http://www.journalnow.com/news/crime/attorneys-allege-jury-misconduct-in-corbett-trial/article_f2c5d737-a38d-5732-998c-8f899c170ed0.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share
 
I strongly believe that MM is suffering from mental illness. I do not think it is something she has made up. My recollection of KM's life with her was that although she told him about her illness; she was embarrassed about it and asked that he not tell anyone else. He kept this secret even though he was pushed to the brink of a mental breakdown himself. This to me suggests that her mental health problems were a source of embarrassment and shame for her and her parents.

At one point, very shortly before she travelled to Ireland, she was taking 16 prescription medicines a day. She had also been prescribed another 10 medications which she was to take 'when necessary'. I cannot see anyone taking that many medicines just to avoid consequences. Whilst I acknowledge this is information provided by her ex. When he wrote the book, MM was a nobody, he protected her identity and, at the end, suggested he hoped she was well and cared for her. He had no axe to grind (IMO). The only reason he spoke out was due to MM stating during the custody hearing that she did not suffer from bi-polar or any other mental illness.

I feel that TM and SM hold themselves up as paragons of American middle-class. They had Four children, three boys and one girl. The three boys are all extremely accomplished. All are employed in federal or government jobs. Then there was MM. MM struggled in high school and missed a lot of time. She did not complete a college degree. She worked low paying jobs, a waitress, nanny, etc. This is not what TM and SM expected from their only daughter.

If anything, I believe that TM and SM have enabled MM her whole life. She has not had any consequences. They have held her up and being something perfect. When, IMO, she is very much broken.

IMO MM was about to lose the only thing that she had ever accomplished and that was being a mother. JC had refused to allow her to adopt the children. Her attempts at proving DV were coming to nothing. I think she knew she was on a countdown and snapped.

All IMO

Thanks for the info about a book. Does anyone have a link?

I see that you are far more kind regarding Molly than I. I will not give her the benefit of having a mental illness that may have contributed to her decision to brutally murder her husband.

What I see is a nasty gold digger who targeted a widower's children and sought to take not only those children, but his hard earned money and the children's inheritance. I see a pathetic woman who knew enough to call her father to assist her with the murder, which tells me one thing: this is not the first time he has helped her avoid consequences for her actions. She grew up to be a nasty woman because her parents allowed her to do whatever she wanted, and Mr FBI appears to be the primary person who covered up her past mistakes.

I think she's simply an angry woman who was not socialized properly. She seems to think that if she wants something, she can take it, and if anyone gets in her way, she simply needs to destroy that person. She was on the phone with her parents during the five hour highly irregular visit they made to her house. Her parents arrived with a baseball bat. If she really had a mental illness, they would have recognized that she was controlled by the illness and they would have spoken to her husband about her crazy intentions. They didn't do that. They arrived with a murder weapon and participated in the murder. Clearly they thought she was in her right mind as she was preparing to murder.

If she was indeed taking sixteen different medications, I suspect that's because she liked to be someone who needs her "meds". What I would like to know is how she got her medications into her murdered husband's body.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
156
Guests online
571
Total visitors
727

Forum statistics

Threads
609,787
Messages
18,258,039
Members
234,762
Latest member
weatherman78
Back
Top