GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #4

[peregrino]

I don't know why and have no coordating info but from the pictures of the house on google maps there was a small red brick wall built and I assumed this was the type of landscaping stone they were talking about . Unless of course they called to a shop specifically for the "school project " its a bit of a strange one imo . If as Tm suggests Jason was choking Molly it would have to be close to hand Tm does not say in the 911 call he used a landscaping stone so I am assuming Mm used this . If this the case I fail to see how while being choked that you grab it and with force hit your attacker . The attacker would be sure to let go The more I think of the story it actually seems nearly impossible that a choking that lasted so long wouldn't result in death or at the very least serious injuries . I assume when if Tms story has some truth in it he woke up and heard arguing he didn't bolt up the stairs straight away he at least listened for 10 maybe 20 second he has to grab the baseball bat because with his bionic hearing he can hear from the basement Jason saying going to kill her so knows her life is in danger come from the basement through the kitchen up the stairs and into the master bedroom . That would take at least 3-4 mins if not longer for a frail man to complete that The landscaping stone is not something you would typically keep in your bedroom unless maybe you were using it as a doorstop of some sort I can't think of any reasonable explanation for it there . Were they even sharing a bedroom? It's highly possible they weren't we have all been there at least I have anyway I don't have anything to confirm this either but if there were marriage problems which I think we nearly all agree there was on some level and considering that Tm and Sm changed plans and took a 4 hr drive having only been there the week previously when Jason's brother visited . There was some issue .
I think it was on the Nancy grace show it gave a list of items from each room that were taken and there seemed to be a lot of stuff belonging to Molly im spare room . Why were Tm and Sm in the basement if the guest room was empty

I agree with what you say, stephanddoody, but crucially I dont believe the skull fractures Jason received could have been inflicted by a stone that could be wielded with one hand. If the stone required two hands to use with such force to cause those injuries, how could someone do that as they were (allegedly) being choked?

 

[stephanddoody]

I agree with what you say, stephanddoody, but crucially I dont believe the skull fractures Jason received could have been inflicted by a stone that could be wielded with one hand. If the stone required two hands to use with such force to cause those injuries, how could someone do that as they were (allegedly) being choked?

Yes you are right . I always assumed the bat did the most damage so Tom used the bat which he grabbed on the way up and Molly used the stone . I suppose we will have to wait for the trial to find out the exact size of the stone maybe a crucial part of the case .

 

[stephanddoody]

Im just thinking back and I think this is another discrepancy that MMs lawyers released to the media

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irelan...betts-children-must-release-notes-425441.html

[FONT=&amp]Mr Corbett’s two children from a previous marriage were seen by a specialist paediatrician in the days following his death.[/FONT][FONT=&amp]Now Dr Evelyn Amy Suttle of Dragonfly House, North Carolina, has been instructed to produce all “medical records, reports, notes, forms, or other documents generated” relating to the medical examinations of Jack and Sarah Corbett during their time at the children’s advocacy centre.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Court documents released last week have revealed the Superior Court of Davidson County in North Carolina last week ruled Ms Martens’ right to a fair trial “outweighs any confidentiality statutes or other confidential protections shielding the requested documents from production and the interests of justice require the materials be produced”.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Last June attorneys acting for Ms Martens had sought a court order preventing the use of a statement given by Jack Corbett as evidence. They claimed the statement, given in Limerick where the Corbett children now live with their aunt, was given “under coercive circumstances without any of the safeguards to ensure trustworthiness or reliability”.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]In that motion to exclude the statement, Ms Martens’ attorney claimed that while at the Dragonfly Centre the Corbett children said their father “would physically and verbally abuse” Ms Martens.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]“Sarah reported that: Her dad started fights with her mom for ridiculous reasons; he would hurt her mom... she saw her dad step on her mom’s foot, pull her mom’s hair, roll over her mom’s foot with the car, hit her mom in the face,” the documents filed by Ms Martens’ attorney read.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]“Jack reported that: His dad would physically and verbally abuse his mom; he would punch, hit and push her... he would scream, get mad and cuss more, he was getting angrier; his mom would try to get him to stop but his dad was strong,” the documents claimed.[/FONT]

Then we have the actually testimony of the paediatrician and counsellor that saw Jack and Sarah was reported in the Daily Mail
https://www.facebook.com/TheIrishMa...495363941342/1910471829210359/?type=3&theater

Molly Martens broke down in a court yesterday when a counsellor revealed her stepson said he had negative feelings toward her
During evidence given by counsellor Andrea Huckabee, it emerged Jack Corbett told her he had witnessed abuse taking place in the home.



Ms Huckabee had a 45 minute session therapeutic therapy session with Jack and Sarah Corbett. She said in that session Mr Corbetts only son made a point of telling her Ms Martens was his step mom and his first mom had passed away



During her session with Jack he said he had negative feelings towards his stepmother. She added he said I don't want to hurt my moms feelings



Ms Huckabee said Sarah had not disclosed witnessing abuse but that Jack had



Yesterdays hearing also heard from a paediatrician who examined Jack and Sarah after their fathers death - who revealed she diagnosed them as victims of child abuse



Paediatrician Dr Amy Suttel gave evidence yesterday at the hearing relating to the admission of evidence in the case - and said she gave a diagnosis that both of Mr Corbett's were victims of child abuse due to exposure to domestic violence




The defence for Ms Marten and her father argue interviews by both children at children's advocacy centre known as Dragonfly House should be put before a jury . Dr Suttel carried out a medical evaluation at the facility in the days after Mrs Corbett's death. She added that she did not make any determination on who was responsible for the abuse . Thats not my job she said. Dr Suttel recommended that both children receive mental health treatment.

So the defence attorney say Sarah witnessed

[FONT=&amp]“Sarah reported that: Her dad started fights with her mom for ridiculous reasons; he would hurt her mom... she saw her dad step on her mom’s foot, pull her mom’s hair, roll over her mom’s foot with the car, hit her mom in the face,” the documents filed by Ms Martens’ attorney read.[/FONT]

But the counsellor said

Ms Huckabee said Sarah had not disclosed witnessing abuse but that Jack had

The defence for Ms Marten and her father argue interviews by both children at children's advocacy centre known as Dragonfly House should be put before a jury . Dr Suttel carried out a medical evaluation at the facility in the days after Mrs Corbett's death. She added that she did not make any determination on who was responsible for the abuse . Thats not my job she said. Dr Suttel reccommended that both children receive mental health treatment.

Also giving evidence yesterday was Detective Nathan Briggs who had arranged interviews for both children in August 2015 at a child advocacy centre in the US after their father had been found dead at his North Carolina home that month . He told the court he feared they had been coached prior to their questioning . Jack and Sarah Corbett were interviewed by trained professionals at the Dragonfly Centre in the days after their fathers death . They were brought there by Molly Martens mother Sharon . Detective Higgs was present in a nearby room when a staff member entered saying Sharon Martens was insisting Jack was interviewed first. We decided Sarah should go first . A lot of the time in investigations we see that the kids have been coached . He added if there was coaching then we would disturb it

So he lied again. Im also wondering where would he get the information that Sarah said those things ? Unless like Mr Briggs suggested that the children were coached and that was what Sarah was told to say to the counsellor when interviewed but she didn't follow through and actually say them

 

[Truthalways]

Im just thinking back and I think this is another discrepancy that MMs lawyers released to the media

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irelan...betts-children-must-release-notes-425441.html


Then we have the actually testimony of the paediatrician and counsellor that saw Jack and Sarah was reported in the Daily Mail
https://www.facebook.com/TheIrishMa...495363941342/1910471829210359/?type=3&theater


So the defence attorney say Sarah witnessed
But the counsellor said


So he lied again. Im also wondering where would he get the information that Sarah said those things ? Unless like Mr Briggs suggested that the children were coached and that was what Sarah was told to say to the counsellor when interviewed but she didn't follow through and actually say them

Significant discrepancies

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

 

[Truthalways]

https://psychologyofakiller.wordpress.com/2016/03/28/do-serial-killers-feel-remorse/

Interesting read. Although it's focus is leaning towards serial killers it talks about one off killers too. I am trying to find a place to fit MM. I'm sure a criminal psychologist or criminologist will be used in court by the prosecution to analyse her behaviour before and after the crime for such things as empathy for the victim, victims family, remorse their are reasons unknown to us as to why there was a push for a Murder 1 charge. If convicted she will be judged as a murderer and having read a few articles such as this you could draw from both types to profile MM.

I think as an earlier post pointed out her behaviour since the crime is abnormal. I think it will playa a big part in the trial.

"One of the most common thoughts that runs through the minds of Psychologists, is whether the murderer regrets the murder.*"

"If the killer, kills one person for one specific reason they tend to end up turning themselves in or regretting what they have done.*


“Serial killers have no remorse when killing people”(Yepez). Personal killers are people who only commit one murder and the personal they kill, is someone they know.

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

 

[emmalpage81]

Im just thinking back and I think this is another discrepancy that MMs lawyers released to the media

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irelan...betts-children-must-release-notes-425441.html


Then we have the actually testimony of the paediatrician and counsellor that saw Jack and Sarah was reported in the Daily Mail
https://www.facebook.com/TheIrishMa...495363941342/1910471829210359/?type=3&theater


So the defence attorney say Sarah witnessed
But the counsellor said


So he lied again. Im also wondering where would he get the information that Sarah said those things ? Unless like Mr Briggs suggested that the children were coached and that was what Sarah was told to say to the counsellor when interviewed but she didn't follow through and actually say them

I believe that the first interview the children gave was to Ms Huckerbee and this interview suggested no abuse. A week later the children were interviewed at Dragonfly House and it was during this time the catalogue of abuse was given (with the officer believing they had been coached on what to say). IMO this is why the childrens testimony willnot be admitted; it is too contradictory

All IMO

 

[stephanddoody]

Thank you for clarifying that. I didn't realise their were two interviews at the dragon house centre . I thought it was the interview via Skype from Ireland that the Martens lawyers were disputing

 

[emmalpage81]

Thank you for clarifying that. I didn't realise their were two interviews at the dragon house centre . I thought it was the interview via Skype from Ireland that the Martens lawyers were disputing

Only one at Dragonfky House the other one was before they went there. I believe there are three separate interviews discussed. The one with the therapist (Ms Huckerbee), one at Dragonfly House and the third was in Ireland. The fact they are contradictory is, IMO, why the Judge has not as yet admitted them.

All IMO

 

[searchinGirl]

Only one at Dragonfky House the other one was before they went there. I believe there are three separate interviews discussed. The one with the therapist (Ms Huckerbee), one at Dragonfly House and the third was in Ireland. The fact they are contradictory is, IMO, why the Judge has not as yet admitted them.

All IMO

The interview beforehand was a screening to get the referral for a child abuse evaluation. The other two interviews: one is probitive and the other prejudicial. I think that is why neither has been admitted yet. IMO

 

[bernie millar]

it makes sense why mm subpoenaed the statement from dr evelyn amy suttle of dragonfly but did not subpoena the notes from the therapist ms huckerbee as she must have known what was in them
and only looked for the one that suited her
imo only

 

[searchinGirl]

it makes sense why mm subpoenaed the statement from dr evelyn amy suttle of dragonfly but did not subpoena the notes from the therapist ms huckerbee as she must have known what was in them
and only looked for the one that suited her
imo only

Because the one was conducted to get the referral for the other. To get the children entered into the system. IMO

 

[bernie millar]

can the same be said for the motion tm submitted claiming his frame of mind was due to mf conversation about jc it would be prejudicial unless of course he had a statement from mf to back up the conversation then it would become probitive ?

 

[peregrino]

The interview beforehand was a screening to get the referral for a child abuse evaluation. The other two interviews: one is probitive and the other prejudicial. I think that is why neither has been admitted yet. IMO

This is curious. The rerms 'probative' and 'predjuducial' are very distinct legal terms. The term 'probative' suggests having the quality or function of proving something to be true; whereas 'preducial' suggests something like harmful or detrimental. I am curious as to what authority you cite to determine that one intervuew is 'probative' while the other is 'predjuducial '? It could be really relevant. Can you let us know the sources of these determinations. Thanks.

 

[searchinGirl]

can the same be said for the motion tm submitted claiming his frame of mind was due to mf conversation about jc it would be prejudicial unless of course he had a statement from mf to back up the conversation then it would become probitive ?

Yes. Probably so. IMO

 

[searchinGirl]

This is curious. The rerms 'probative' and 'predjuducial' are very distinct legal terms. The term 'probative' suggests having the quality or function of proving something to be true; whereas 'preducial' suggests something like harmful or detrimental. I am curious as to what authority you cite to determine that one intervuew is 'probative' while the other is 'predjuducial '? It could be really relevant. Can you let us know the sources of these determinations. Thanks.

No I can't provide sources other than myself. I stated it as my opinion. It is what I see. The defendants are on trial here. Decisions are made according to their rights.

 

[bernie millar]

if detective nathan briggs arranged the interview at dragonfly center who arranged the screening?

 

[peregrino]

No I can't provide sources other than myself. I stated it as my opinion. It is what I see. The defendants are on trial here. Decisions are made according to their rights.

Ok. Understood. I think we all have to be careful with using such definitive terms as 'probative' and 'predjuducial ' as they may be construed as implying an authority on our own opinions. As long as it is clear you have no authorative basis for using those terms then that is ok. Let's move on.

 

[searchinGirl]

if detective nathan briggs arranged the interview at dragonfly center who arranged the screening?

It was probably Social Services. Regardless of who set up the interviews, it's the professionals who conducted the interviews that stand behind them. There are protocols and procedures. Did the children have a court appointed guardian?

 

[Logic-lady]

Im just thinking back and I think this is another discrepancy that MMs lawyers released to the media

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irelan...betts-children-must-release-notes-425441.html


Then we have the actually testimony of the paediatrician and counsellor that saw Jack and Sarah was reported in the Daily Mail
https://www.facebook.com/TheIrishMa...495363941342/1910471829210359/?type=3&theater


So the defence attorney say Sarah witnessed
But the counsellor said


So he lied again. Im also wondering where would he get the information that Sarah said those things ? Unless like Mr Briggs suggested that the children were coached and that was what Sarah was told to say to the counsellor when interviewed but she didn't follow through and actually say them

I believe that the first interview the children gave was to Ms Huckerbee and this interview suggested no abuse. A week later the children were interviewed at Dragonfly House and it was during this time the catalogue of abuse was given (with the officer believing they had been coached on what to say). IMO this is why the childrens testimony willnot be admitted; it is too contradictory

All IMO

The interview beforehand was a screening to get the referral for a child abuse evaluation. The other two interviews: one is probitive and the other prejudicial. I think that is why neither has been admitted yet. IMO

Ms Huckerbee assessed the children on the basis that they were present in the home during a domestic incident which ended with a death, therefore on that basis alone the children were referred for further counselling as would be standard practise in this scenario. One would wonder how the defense had such a clear indication of what was contained in the Dragonfly House interviews. Were the children aware that anything they said in those interviews would be requested by the defense? If so IMO it is highly unlikely that they would have felt able to speak freely in that scenario.

 

[bernie millar]

at the interview with dragonfly center? no as it was sm who brought them i dont know who brought them to the therapist if it was mm then yes as she was appointed temporary guardian and the one in ireland was in the courts legally appointed guardians house attended by the boys professional councillor and conducted by either a member of the sheriffs office or the district attorney either of which would in my opinion be professional in their role , whats your opinion on the differing statements between therapist and dragonfly dr ?
moo