Why wasn't this trial broadcast live? So many NC trials are televised, yet I'm reading that people want transcripts to know what was said. Was it broadcast and the files are missing, or was it not broadcast and, if not, why not?
GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #10
- Thread starter Tricia
- Start date
kittythehare
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2016
- Messages
- 18,561
- Reaction score
- 109,034
Was not broadcast.
Judge did not allow recordings or cameras within the courtroom.
Info came piecemeal, most of it inaccurate or biased via twitter updates and next day reports which were all minimal.
I wonder if the judge was sensitive to the fact that one of the accused is an FBI guy, and there was concern that if he was found not guilty he would be vulnerable. On the other hand, given that the victims were in Ireland, I think that allowing them to watch the trial from home should have been more important than the potential rights of the accused.
I've watched several NC trials live online over the years.
Hello all,
The recording of home life at panther creek - included in link from 7:30 to 8 minutes- do people think it is real? Have the Corbetts commented on whether they believe the tape to be genuine?
if it is real it definitely shows things were not happy.
Also so is that SC crying out at the end?
I would be ashamed if i behaved like that in my home and I would be very worried if my daughter or sister was subjected to that.
https://youtu.be/sg-ZnGvBkgI
There is something desperately not right with this whole story and situation. You have one dead wife, a new fairytale relationship, mental illness, a dead husband and 2 people in prison. You almost could not make it up.
If this tape is real i cannot understand why the defence did not introduce it. It is highly suggestive of domestic abuse. Was this the M's strategy all along to hold back evidence for an appeal.
Im interested to know if the tape is real or not. Thank you.
The recording of home life at panther creek - included in link from 7:30 to 8 minutes- do people think it is real? Have the Corbetts commented on whether they believe the tape to be genuine?
if it is real it definitely shows things were not happy.
Also so is that SC crying out at the end?
I would be ashamed if i behaved like that in my home and I would be very worried if my daughter or sister was subjected to that.
https://youtu.be/sg-ZnGvBkgI
There is something desperately not right with this whole story and situation. You have one dead wife, a new fairytale relationship, mental illness, a dead husband and 2 people in prison. You almost could not make it up.
If this tape is real i cannot understand why the defence did not introduce it. It is highly suggestive of domestic abuse. Was this the M's strategy all along to hold back evidence for an appeal.
Im interested to know if the tape is real or not. Thank you.
Grouchymom
Verified Grouchymom
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2017
- Messages
- 615
- Reaction score
- 87
https://www.facebook.com/TheIrishMail/
This is the first I have seen about the children being adopted by TL and DL.
This is the first I have seen about the children being adopted by TL and DL.
Attachments
Wyle_E_Coyote
Northern Virginia
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2011
- Messages
- 4,109
- Reaction score
- 7,777
Can't be used in appeal, that has to be legal arguments only, defense can't introduce evidence they didn't bring in at trial.
Why didn't the defense introduce it?
1. Because a single argument most certainly does not imply domestic abuse, especially in the absence of collaborating evidence.
2. There was no collaborating evidence. No ER visits, no medical records to document injuries, no friends or acquaintances with stories of MM having black eyes or bruises, no history of 911 calls to the house, no friends or acquaintances of JC with stories of his violent temper, etc.
3. To introduce the recording, MM would have to take the stand, which would open her up for cross examination and a whole lot of questions from the prosecution that she did not want to answer, like the rock, her medical history, her fake childbirth stories, her consultation with a divorce attorney (especially with regards to custody), etc.
That recording could only have hurt her.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
In relation to collaborating evidence wouldnt the nurse who says that Jason outlined to her that he got angry for unexplained reasons count as that? I think the defence could have outlined a narrative that DV existed in the Panther Creek home.
Cappuccino
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2011
- Messages
- 3,976
- Reaction score
- 3,208
They would still have needed MM to take the witness stand and testify to it.
SeattleSleuth
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2017
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 1
Class act. Their actions in focusing on kids and working through their personal grief speaks volumes about their motives and hearts.
Jennifer17
Former Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2017
- Messages
- 9,552
- Reaction score
- 50,587
Have you read through this whole thread?
courtney2662
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2016
- Messages
- 173
- Reaction score
- 41
Is it really though, is it that indicative of domestic abuse by Jason, or is it in fact by Molly, who was manipulating the situation for her own purposes, to try and document DV so that she could use it to take JC children from him? Another poster has pointed out more succinctly that (1) the child yelling out "stop it" certainly didn't show any fear in her demand they stop fighting, and that's unusual if she were as afraid of her father as Molly stated in her 20/20 interview; and (2) Jason showed more frustration over Molly's actions trying to interfere in his relationship with his kids, whom he loved - all he wanted was to have dinner with them when he came in from work. If it is highly suggestive of domestic abuse, it would be by Molly who was known to publicly verbally abuse Jason, she's the one with the history of it, not Jason. Also, she had recorders all over the house according to Jack, why hadn't she recorded that supposed fight night of Aug 2nd 2015 if indeed there was a fight at all, which is highly doubtful since in interview she said Sarah woke with nightmare around 3.00am but her father was on with 911 operator at 3.20am. More lies and manipulations by Molly, using her interview to try and drag Sarah into being her witness.
stephanddoody
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2016
- Messages
- 1,070
- Reaction score
- 36
It takes 60-90 days to prepare court transcripts. Personally to me I hear the sound of sheer frustration in Jason's voice that he is being yet again isolated and ignored . Sc says stop fighting. Not stop dad . More than one person involved in the argument. That is not the full recording . It does not suggest domestic abuse . To me it suggests Molly purposefully agitating Jason in order to get a recording to try to prove Dv that her divorce lawyer/fundraising fraudster friend told her she would have to do in order to get custody of Jason's children. To the prosecution it could prove premeditated. To the defence it's useless.Which brings me back to Molly on ABC . She admits she was told to document everything in order to gain custody when she vists the divorce lawyer in 2012. Why if her foot was rolled over possibly the foot that has caused her years of trouble did she not go to the hospital in order to obtain medical records to back up her claim . I mean it's a medical record be great to have to submit, there would at least be some damage to your foot if it was rolled over . But yet no medical evidence. Why ? Because it's all made up . Other than recordings which played in their entirety would probably show a completely different story . It's easy go on a TV show and have it heavily edited to suit the narrative your hoping another thing altogether to go to a court of law .
I can see where you're coming from, but I don't believe the two things (1. being mentally unstable and 2. being a nasty piece of work) are mutually exclusive. IMO it's quite possible to be both! I know some lovely people who have mental health issues, but I also know some who are far from lovely. The unfortunate thing is that she must have been 'enabled' over a long period to become what she is now. And a lot of innocent people, as well as some who are not so innocent, are paying the price.
I have no idea if it's real or fake. Even if it is... It's an argument. It's not pretty. It's not nice.
But hey, they happen in most houses at some point.
But if that's the worst there is, and I have a feeling that they would have picked the worst, it's not abuse. And it's certainly not grounds for beating a man to death, after death and his family beyond death. Way beyond.
Electric Sheep
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2010
- Messages
- 424
- Reaction score
- 220
So how dod Molly come to have the Lithium that Jason's sister testify about at the custody hearing?
Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk
stmarysmead
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,295
- Reaction score
- 16,723
Calling this taoe "abuse" is like a man standing in a puddle telling a drowning man...that they have the same problems. It's quite a fantastic stretch.
I HAVE had a daughter subjected to abuse. You don't ignore your abuser You don't talk over him like MM is doing. You don't isolate the abuser from family dinners that you know will provoke him. Fear doesn't let you.
Abuse is about living in a constant pervasive state of fear, weighing every word, trying to always anticipate and avoid trouble. Like a dog that runs under the bed when his Master's voice is angry...there are learned reactions. MM shows none of these in this tape. It's real and it shows her to be a liar.
The key word about these behaviors is..."learned." The abused are trying to survive, get through another day, walk a tightrope not to provoke. Abuse TEACHES them certain reactions, MM shows none of these.
If you have ever seen abuse, been close to it...you'd never forget it. And you'd never call this puddle, an ocean. It's not about raised voices. It's about bruises and abrasions, broken furniture, ripped up papers you have worked hard on for classes, walls punched in...Its about spitting at you in front of neighbors as you try to leave.
It's not a raised voice alone.
Where is the documentation of any thing like this?
Not getting your own way is not ABUSE.
Abused women do not fat shame their abusers in front of others as MM. did. They don't ridicule. If he wants dinner with the family, by God, that's what you do...even if it's at midnight.
In this tape...she's setting him up. MM Is calculated. She knows how much time with those children mean to him. So she feeds them early with HER, so JC has to eat alone. Isolated. "These are MY children."
She ignores him willfully, talking only to the children. She is humiliating him in front of them purposely.
He raises his voice. Okay.
This is abuse on HIS part?
This is the worst she had for ABC?
But it's terrific that she did this interview. She's now on tape saying JC was standing until the last blow. Remember all that blood above the floorboards?
Oh, I cannot wait for the civil suit.
But please, in deference to those who live and suffer from DV, let's not call this puddle an ocean.
Yiu try
stephanddoody
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2016
- Messages
- 1,070
- Reaction score
- 36
Yes and the exes book . I would think she does have a mental illness. In the ABC . Molly says she felt uncomfortable in JCs home because she thought things were developing too fast . She said she didn't want to ring home because she didn't want to tell her parents she FAILED AGAIN . Whether that is to be believed or not I don't know . Is it a lie or is it another way of shifting the blame I'm not sure . To me she most certainly has trouble accepting her own failings and taking responsibility for her actions .
An unhappy marriage does not equate to domestic violence. I am sure this was the "best"recording she had. Obviously it couldn't be used as it proves nothing other than entrapment.
Even her defense team knew this.
Logic-lady
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2016
- Messages
- 733
- Reaction score
- 138
Not really. Unless he had stated that he got angry with his wife for unexplained reasons. Domestic abusers don't normally seek help for their anger issues as they see them as normal behaviour. If JC felt that somehow his new medication was to blame for sudden feelings of anger and it was so out of character for him that he thought to bring it up with the nurse practitioner, that would imply to me that said angry behaviour was not the norm for him.
I don't think any of us here believe that life at 160 Panther Creek was all sunshine and roses, multiple witnesses have stated as such. What we were all waiting for was evidence of DV to be presented at trial to validate MM, even the prosecution was expecting it! But they did not present one single shred of evidence. DV is an ugly thing, to falsely accuse someone of it is even uglier. There were many people in MM's life in the period she lived in the US with JC who must have witnessed something if it really happened...all the jury needed was reasonable doubt. They were not given any evidence at trial to consider that eventuality.
Actually on that note, in most of the pictures on FB SM is in attendance. It appears she spent swathes of time with her daughter, surely over 4 years she would have witnessed something? Anything at all, one tiny thing that would have at least cast reasonable doubt? She could have taken the stand in her daughters defense, couldn't she........
stmarysmead
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,295
- Reaction score
- 16,723
If they could have, then why didn't they?
TM testified he had NO knowledge of abuse. Why wouldn't his daughter, knowing he hated her husband, have confided this abuse in her Father?
Here's another interesting observation. Molly wanted the DV to come in through the children's statements. She wanted her story told through the police video.
Why? Because, at all costs, she needed to avoid testifying. She needed others to say it, not her.
Why?
She had the opportunity to tell her story and to testify to her abuse. If the judge ruled against it being done for her by proxy...she still had the right to get it all in herself.
She could have introduced her police video...but only if she testified and subjected herself to cross examination,
She could have played that ABC tape, but only if she introduced the DV through her own testimony.
She could have called DV experts. Sympathetic friends.
But only if she testified.
But she did not want to be cross examined. She would rather NOT bring DV into a trial that will take away 20+ years of her life away, than get up on the stand and testify herself.
Why?
Just a note on that recording, when JC raised his voice did MM make any attempt to get herself or the children out of that situation. NO, in fact, she was about to make pancakes to me that suggests that she that she had no fear of him what-so-ever.