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

[peregrino]

Looks like this thread is not a place for discussing criminal cases objectively but rather it's being run by a certain group of Irish individuals under pseudonyms who are using it as a platform to ensure nothing but what they agree with is tolerated on social media. This is a victim friendly forum whereby the victims behaviour, be it good or bad, can be discussed if it is to substantiate the issue and case and done so in a respectful way. Discussing autopsy injuries and giving another interpretation of them is apparently not allowed in some quarters. Whilst open degradation of a family who have not been convicted of any offence is openly encouraged in certain Facebook pages pertaining to Justice, any speculation that questions the status quo is met with rage. Which leads me to
wonder about the ethics of the US system which allows pre-trial evidence to be aired and its effect on potentially contaminating a jury pool. I have seen a few people raise this on certain Facebook pages only to be shot down with claims of 'we know all we need to know, we don't need due process, we don't care about what a defence has to say, we have all we need to know guilty as charged'. I am glad as a US citizen that I am protected by the 1st amendment and have also abided by the rules of this forum which allows respectful debate.

I do not agree that this thread is "being run by a certain group of Irish individuals under pseudonyms using it as a platform to ensure nothing but what they agree with is tolerated on social media." I am Irish. I dont belong to any group. My views are my own. All of the posters on this thread are American, Irish and probably other nationalities as well. We all have strong opinions. We dont always agree. We are all human and often we slip from fact to conjecture. But it is incumbent on all of us to debate using temperate language. We could all do with toning things down a little and avoiding reference to facebook campaigns. As Abraham Lincoln famously once said, "You shouldn't always believe everything you read on Facebook!"

 

[Conger]

So you receive a multitude of injuries from not one but two people and you wouldn't strike back in defence? Ok, if you say you wouldn't then you wouldn't. I'm a man and if another male or female was hitting me around the head with a paving stone or bat I'd sure as hell do anything to fend them off. But that's just difference in opinion

In relation to the strike to the head, depending on the force of the blow, and especially so if this was struck from the rear, in my opinion, this would almost certainly create a reaction of defence in the victim as opposed to an offensive reaction. Not to belittle the point or go off point, but compare it to a strike received from one player to another player in a game of hurling, both players have protective head gear on, you rarely see the receiver of the blow jumping up and tangling with the perpetrator. It maybe a bad comparison, I apologise for that as the two involved would be fit athletes, but in most instances of this it causes disorientation and concussion in the receiver.
IMHO

 

[wildebeest]

So you receive a multitude of injuries from not one but two people and you wouldn't strike back in defence? Ok, if you say you wouldn't then you wouldn't. I'm a man and if another male or female was hitting me around the head with a paving stone or bat I'd sure as hell do anything to fend them off. But that's just difference in opinion

Not if you were sound asleep, in my opinion. By the way, I am also an American.

 

[Truthseeker79]

There was an attempt in Australia when a man went to trial for the murder of an Irish girl ( sorry her name is lost to me)....both prosecution abs defence applied to the judge for a Facebook media ban as the presumption of guilt and pre-trial bias could jeopardise both a prosecution and conviction. In some US states judges have issued pre-trial media bans due to the risk of tainting jury pool as well as presumption of guilt being spread far and wide before any trial even happened. Think it will happen more and more.

 

[Mom2catieandtwins]

There was an attempt in Australia when a man went to trial for the murder of an Irish girl ( sorry her name is lost to me)....both prosecution abs defence applied to the judge for a Facebook media ban as the presumption of guilt and pre-trial bias could jeopardise both a prosecution and conviction. In some US states judges have issued pre-trial media bans due to the risk of tainting jury pool as well as presumption of guilt being spread far and wide before any trial even happened. Think it will happen more and more.

As social media continues to grow, bans will be a normal acurance. I belong to a book club, we read true crime books. Many times we focus on new crimes. That is how I was introduced to the Murder of Jason Corbett. I admit, the first thing I do when I am introduced to a suspect is google their social media. Molly at the time was posting a lot (many post are still public). From her postings I formed an opinion about her character and mental health. I wonder if in the years to come, all victims and suspects will immediately have their social media accounts closed by LE.

 

[stmarysmead]

I was attracted to this case because of the DV element and began with a definite strong sympathy for Molly. I also researched her FB and Instagram pages and that is when I began to doubt her credibility and mental health. If she were my client, I would advise her to close those pages down ASAP.

It was weeks before I found the other FB page.

There is one insurmountable problem here. I think that almost immediately TM and MM decided that the only way to save (essentially) their lives and reputations was to destroy the reputation of the man that they killed. This is key, true or not. They can show no remorse, empathy for the grieving family, any normal sign of regret...Jason must be made an absolute monster that deserved to die.

In addition, they could not even wait till the Irish family,in shock, arrived..before they would start their campaign to take the children.

They must have known that was rubbing salt in a wound. The treatment of Jason's family, with whom they seemingly had a good relationship was terribly self-serving and cruel. I understand it to a certain point, but it exceeds that in just the basic norms of decency.

Imagine this family...getting the briefest of calls "Wayne, there's been an accident. Your brother is dead." HANG UP.

Who does that? Where was the slightest bit of human empathy? This is so beyond the pale that it does influence my feeling about the Martens. We all love our own, but surely we can empathize with the parents, twin, family members receiving such shocking news!

And then finding out that he was being painted a monster who deserved a heinous death. And the Attorney's statement. "Molly just wants to get passed this and on with her life."

Like Jason life meant nothing.

The way the Martens comported themselves as they set out to save themselves, the callousness to the Corbetts...of course, has influenced those who are friends with the family.

It changed my opinion.

 

[Mom2catieandtwins]

I was attracted to this case because of the DV element and began with a definite strong sympathy for Molly. I also researched her FB and Instagram pages and that is when I began to doubt her credibility and mental health. If she were my client, I would advise her to close those pages down ASAP.

It was weeks before I found the other FB page.

There is one insurmountable problem here. I think that almost immediately TM and MM decided that the only way to save (essentially) their lives and reputations was to destroy the reputation of the man that they killed. This is key, true or not. They can show no remorse, empathy for the grieving family, any normal sign of regret...Jason must be made an absolute monster that deserved to die.

In addition, they could not even wait till the Irish family,in shock, arrived..before they would start their campaign to take the children.

Imagine this family...getting the briefest of calls "Wayne, there's been an accident. Yiur brother is dead." HANG UP. Who does that? Where was the slightest bit of human empathy? This is do beyond the pale that it does influence my feeling about the Martens. We all love our own, but surely we can empathize with the parents, twin, family members receiving such shocking news!

The way the Martens comported themselves as they set out to save themselves, the callousness to the Corbetts...of course, has influenced those who are friends with the family.

I agree with your thoughts 100%!

I found the complete disregard for Mags Corbett horrible. The many post that state "I am your Mommy" or "I was chosen to be your Mom." show a complete disregard for Mags Corbett. It shows a complete lack of empathy and sympathy in my opinion. Molly wanted her way. She did not consider anyone's feelings but her own. She showed zero remorse for the children who lost their father, or any one in the Corbett family. That speaks volumes to me.

 

[kittythehare]

Ok, I think a picture will describe what I mean. When written in an autopsy "blood under the nail" this is what it means. If he was his own blood scrapped under his fingernails they would say "blood samples and fibres were removed from under the nail". Thats the difference.

Blood is liquid, gravity determines its course.
Short nails do not preclude blood being underneath them.

 

[kittythehare]

Police officer who was at the scene wrote in the report which was based on what he saw at that time at the crime scene " Neither Thomas Michael Martens nor Molly Paige Corbett suffered any injuries about their person". So it was a report written by the police officer who made a visible examination at the crime scene of the two adults. This is all we have to go on regarding her lack of injuries, a single polic officers observations looking for pyhsical signs of injury on that night.

Here is an exerpt from FOX News report

" Later in the search warrant, the officer described the physical appearances of Martens and Corbett along with describing the crime scene.The search warrant states:
"Neither Thomas Michael Martens nor Molly Paige Corbett suffered any injuries about their person."

I note your failure to mention the entire Grand jJury process. They only took a day to decide the martens should be indicted for murder based on the evidence shown to them,

 

[KateB]

A link to "Bring Justice for Jason" Facebook is part of the opening post of this thread. It is an approved support page for the ultimate victim in this case. Comments on it that can be made by anyone are not to be linked/copied/discussed, but links to updates by the page administrator are allowed.

Hope that helps explain the forum rules.

 

[cushla123]

There is of course an Irish interest here. Speaking for myself Ive read threads on websluths for years but its the first time ive ever signed up and posted and im sure many of us newbie Irish posters are the same....

Initally when i heard the story on Irish Media i felt so sorry for MM, then as details emerged and after reading more info on the case my sympathies lie with the victim and his family.

In saying all that im not a bit impressed with MM facebook posts nor the Justice for Jason posts. The latter i believe they should focus on Jason and not be posting things about the Martens and the mention of Molly's brother etc.

<modsnip>

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[stmarysmead]

I think it's very instructive to hear the other side. Often the questions we pose here are ones that might be posed at trial, ones the jury might ponder.
Can any of MM's supporters answer why...or propose a theory...once Jason was hit with the bat....and Molly was out of Jason's grasp (this is accepting her DV story for discussion purposes) ...why did she run and get a brick instead of calling 911 for assistance?

How can either of them justify getting a second weapon? It means someone was free enough to arm themselves but chose joining the beating instead of calling police.

Any ideas? Anything other than wanted to join a thrill kill which is my theory.

My opinion only as always.

 

[kittythehare]

I think it's very instructive to hear the other side. Often the questions we pose here are ones that might be posed at trial, ones the jury might ponder.

If any if MM's supporters can answer why, once Jason was hit with the bat....and Molly was out of Jason's grasp (this is accepting her DV story for discussion purposes) ...why did she run and get a brick instead of calling 911 for assistance?

How can either of them justify getting a second weapon? It means someone was free enough to arm themselves but chose joining the beating instead of calling police.

Any ideas?.

we do not know she ran.
We do not know the 2 weapons were not brought to Jason's bedroom at the same time.

 

[Hotchips]

There is of course an Irish interest here. Speaking for myself Ive read threads on websluths for years but its the first time ive ever signed up and posted and im sure many of us newbie Irish posters are the same....

Initally when i heard the story on Irish Media i felt so sorry for MM, then as details emerged and after reading more info on the case my sympathies lie with the victim and his family.

In saying all that im not a bit impressed with MM facebook posts nor the Justice for Jason posts. The latter i believe they should focus on Jason and not be posting things about the Martens and the mention of Molly's brother etc.

<modsnip>
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Posts like the most recent one on the justice page may be well intentioned however they tend to incite the commentary where the name calling occurs and is best ignored. I had a feeling this forum was being monitored and it saddens me that the forum has been highighted in the manner posted. I agree with you it should focus only on their memories of jason and pay tribute to his life but they will run it as they think best. My sympathies also lie with the victim and their family. They lost a loved one but the martens are mounting a defence to this and at the end of the day a jury will decide on their fate and no amount of social media campaigning or character assassinating will imo have any bearing on what they decide. Same applies to the martens with their stepford wife potrayal of molly. It will be decided on the opinions of the jury after being presented with the evidence from both sides. It may look straightforward but i dont believe it will be.

 

[stmarysmead]

Excuse me? The J4J page is linked in the media links; if you would like to show me where I have been disingenuous with forum rules, I will edit my post.

For all newbies: WS has a great "ignore" function. Go to your settings and add any name you wish. You will not see those posts.

I love it.

 

[stmarysmead]

we do not know she ran.
We do not know the 2 weapons were not brought to Jason's bedroom at the same time.

Very true. But we know that both weapons were used.

So, one assailant that switches weapons? From a bat to the "up lose and personal" brick where their hand grips the weapon so close, so intimate to the victim? Now that is rage, isn't it?

That could be a scenario with one perpetrator.

But if there's two killers...that's two pairs of hands...one pair could be calling police for help instead of joining in the beat down.

We shall see.

If I were on that jury, I would ram that home over and over as we decided their fates.

My opinion only,of course.

 

[Truthseeker79]

I note your failure to mention the entire Grand jJury process. They only took a day to decide the martens should be indicted for murder based on the evidence shown to them,

have you ever found a grand jury that did not follow a prosecutors recommendation to indictment? That's why here there is debate on whether or not we need a Grand Jury as 99% of Grand Juries follow the prosecutors recommendations; they are a rubber stamp for the DA.

A lot of the defence will look at how this case was investigated to start with. They will ask why the persons of interest were only interviewed once, very unusual. I would want to hear their story then bring them back in to try catch them out and question more. Also the evidence gathered for search warrants were purely circumstantial. Did they finger print her neck? Read about a new laser light that certain LE are using that highlights fingerprints on a neck where there is no visible markings. This is open to debate as to whether it was said or not but a friend of MM ( not relative) made a claim saying a police officer said 'women who curl their hair in my experience rarely are victims of DV'....presume he meant if a victim of DV would not be a glamorous person. Could they claim a prejudice/bias towards taking her claims seriously? Also the bombarding of the DA's office, whilst the DA will of course claim they were impartial, there were even Irish politicians calling as well as thousands of emails demanding a charge being brought. Just thinking of Stephen Avery and claims made the DA was under pressure to bring a charge, also he met the victims family ( and rightly so) a lot more that the persons of interest so he was hearing their side of the story a lot. Just claims the defence will make to say there may have been an inherent bias in the investigation from the outset. I'm not saying there was....just thinking that is an angel a defence will use.

 

[kittythehare]

have you ever found a grand jury that did not follow a prosecutors recommendation to indictment? That's why here there is debate on whether or not we need a Grand Jury as 99% of Grand Juries follow the prosecutors recommendations; they are a rubber stamp for the DA.

A lot of the defence will look at how this case was investigated to start with. They will ask why the persons of interest were only interviewed once, very unusual. I would want to hear their story then bring them back in to try catch them out and question more. Also the evidence gathered for search warrants were purely circumstantial. Did they finger print her neck? Read about a new laser light that certain LE are using that highlights fingerprints on a neck where there is no visible markings. This is open to debate as to whether it was said or not but a friend of MM ( not relative) made a claim saying a police officer said 'women who curl their hair in my experience rarely are victims of DV'....presume he meant if a victim of DV would not be a glamorous person. Could they claim a prejudice/bias towards taking her claims seriously? Also the bombarding of the DA's office, whilst the DA will of course claim they were impartial, there were even Irish politicians calling as well as thousands of emails demanding a charge being brought. Just thinking of Stephen Avery and claims made the DA was under pressure to bring a charge, also he met the victims family ( and rightly so) a lot more that the persons of interest so he was hearing their side of the story a lot. Just claims the defence will make to say there may have been an inherent bias in the investigation from the outset. I'm not saying there was....just thinking that is an angel a defence will use.

Hearsay

 

[stmarysmead]

have you ever found a grand jury that did not follow a prosecutors recommendation to indictment? That's why here there is debate on whether or not we need a Grand Jury as 99% of Grand Juries follow the prosecutors recommendations; they are a rubber stamp for the DA.

A lot of the defence will look at how this case was investigated to start with. They will ask why the persons of interest were only interviewed once, very unusual. I would want to hear their story then bring them back in to try catch them out and question more. Also the evidence gathered for search warrants were purely circumstantial. Did they finger print her neck? Read about a new laser light that certain LE are using that highlights fingerprints on a neck where there is no visible markings. This is open to debate as to whether it was said or not but a friend of MM ( not relative) made a claim saying a police officer said 'women who curl their hair in my experience rarely are victims of DV'....presume he meant if a victim of DV would not be a glamorous person. Could they claim a prejudice/bias towards taking her claims seriously? Also the bombarding of the DA's office, whilst the DA will of course claim they were impartial, there were even Irish politicians calling as well as thousands of emails demanding a charge being brought. Just thinking of Stephen Avery and claims made the DA was under pressure to bring a charge, also he met the victims family ( and rightly so) a lot more that the persons of interest so he was hearing their side of the story a lot. Just claims the defence will make to say there may have been an inherent bias in the investigation from the outset. I'm not saying there was....just thinking that is an angel a defence will use.

They admitted to beating the life out of the man, so no need for Hercule Poirot.

Some officier said..."women who curl their hair, etc"...how glamourous can any woman be in the early morning hours after she has been part of a rage killing? That's silly. I doubt she looked like her hair had been done by the stylists at Vogue. Close up MM is not very attractive IMO...she was never really a model. After searching that website, anyone can sign up and post pictures. Not selective.

I have a much higher opinion of LE here in the states, especially dealing with an FBI man and his daughter. I believe they were meticulous, hence the long delay in bringing charges.

I think any defense like this would sound unprofessional and not be used by a credible attorney. But that's my opinion only.

 

[kittythehare]

http://www.americanbar.org/publicat...ion_archive/crimjust_standards_pfunc_blk.html