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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

Thanks . I personally feel it would be in the best interest of the children (now and especially in their later life) if none of the interviews were admitted into evidence . It is too much of a weight on their young little shoulders .
I'm sure most parents would agree
 
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

Thanks . I personally feel it would be in the best interest of the children (now and especially in their later life) if none of the interviews were admitted into evidence . It is too much of a weight on their young little shoulders .
I'm sure most parents would agree

I couldn't agree more. There are plenty of adults on both sides who can testify at the trial. The kids need to be left alone to heal.
 
i agree and think none of the childrens statements should have been reported in the media
 
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?

I may be mistaken here, but my understanding at the time was that initially (so for the initial Ms Huckerbee screening assessment) DSS felt that the children had a satisfactory guardian in Molly and therefore there would not have been a need to request a court appointed one.

It seems that concerns were raised by the professionals involved in these latter interviews that resulted in the kids being removed from Molly's care and placed with the Lynches (their legally appointed guardians at that point)
 
I couldn't agree more. There are plenty of adults on both sides who can testify at the trial. The kids need to be left alone to heal.
Yes I feel their lives have already been turned upside down they have lost their Dad and everything they loved and I include Mm and their lives in American in this .Their lives are on display we know what they eat what they wear what music they listen to what sports they are good what clothes they wear their favourite toys . Their right to privacy has been breached . Their inner most personal thoughts should remain just that. They deserve that
t
 
As a parent I also agree with this.
J&S have been through so much pain in their short lives more than anyone should ever have to deal with...
 
I cannot fathom that anyone who reads and comprehends the brutality in JC's autopsy report could have any hesitancy in finding these two defendants guilty as charged.

There is no question that even if their story had any truth in it...the intent was not to stop Jason. The intent was to kill him, to inflict terrible pain upon him, to splatter his brain tissue on the bedroom walls, to follow horrifically painful, constant blows with a baseball bat with the crushing pounding of a landscape stone into his bones and flesh.

That's not opinion. That's a summary of the autopsy report. Is it difficult to read my words? Imagine what Jason endured. What his family endures thinking of what they have read of the overkill that ended their loved ones life,

I don't believe for one moment that JC was an abuser. He was the man behind the camera...providing a fabulous life for the extremely ill daughter of the proud Martens family...the daughter whose previous lover was so damaged by his stint of living with her....that he published a book to help himself heal. This is the daughter they allowed to jet from a mental hospital to a job in a foreign country caring for motherless infants.

Read the book. Read the autopsy. American law does not allow for private in-home executions...even if you cry abuse. And the abuse claim is severely tainted by the "wedding warning" lie fiasco...that shows Daddy Martens credibility as challenged as his daughters.

All my own opinion and all that.
 
I sincerely hope that the "wedding warning" lie will be heard by the jury. This really goes to not just credibility...but to character. I had been on the fence about TM. There is a certain compassion that one might feel,for a parent trying to save his child. To me, this compassion was limited by the selfish, reckless behavior of allowing MM to leave the mental ward and assume care of infant children in a foreign country. That's not being loving and protective of your daughter...you are an ocean apart! And it is heinously indifferent to the safety of the motherless children put in her care. So my compassion for TM was somewhat limited by that reckless, selfish act.

But this attempt to draw in Jason's dead wife's family and essentially make them MM's saviors...the vile act of saddling Mag's grieving family with a LIE...that might help free the murderers of their grandchildren's father...this is beyond the pale!

They were trying to use a lie credited to a dead man who loved Jason...to help free his murderers! They are now trying to say to those children that it's okay that they killed Daddy...because their DEAD grandfather thought he killed their Mom!

They killed JC. The guilt should be theirs alone. But if they coached the children to lie...they also slimed guilt onto those children...pulling them into providing alibis for their Fathers murderers...telling lies about their Fathers character. Then, to add additional cover, they decide to blame Mags father for their state of mind.

What kind of people could stoop so low? Really...think this one through in all its ramifications.

The more you think about the immense cruelty of this lie...to the family if the first wife...to these children that they moan their love for...the real picture of the character of this family emerges.

This is the picture the jury needs to see. All my opinion only.
 
WARNING GRAPHIC: The autopsy report clearly shows that a man was decimated. Now just imagine what the actual photographs of the crime scene and J’s body might show? How many strikes does it take with a bat and paving stone to remove the “perceived” threat? Now imagine a jury or anyone who sees the carnage depicted in actual photos. What do they see and how do they react? Just like TM in the 911 call, in total disgust when asked to perform CPR when he stated “He’s a mess”? Facts are facts. The autopsy report and photos will not lie. It is what it is. Does not matter what MM, TM, ME, or their lawyers, friends, or family tries to spin. Facts will carry the day if there is any justice. Without doubt based on the facts that we have to date, the autopsy report, clearly shows that the “perceived” threat was not just removed, he was annihilated. What position was J in? On his knees on the floor, in the bed, in the shower? Just not sure that claims of abuse can ever counter the facts of the brutality J suffered. Is the abuse claim just subterfuge to mask the inhumanity of the suffering that the victim was forced to endure and to remove their guilt for participating in such a horrific act? If so, a jury of their peers will have no problem with recognizing the deception and understanding that this was overkill, a rage beyond comprehension as the autopsy report seems to indicate and the photos will leave NO doubt. If there is plea then we all know what that means, the facts are the facts. The autopsy report and photos left no doubt about what really happened.
 
I sincerely hope that the "wedding warning" lie will be heard by the jury. This really goes to not just credibility...but to character. I had been on the fence about TM. There is a certain compassion that one might feel,for a parent trying to save his child. To me, this compassion was limited by the selfish, reckless behavior of allowing MM to leave the mental ward and assume care of infant children in a foreign country. That's not being loving and protective of your daughter...you are an ocean apart! And it is heinously indifferent to the safety of the motherless children put in her care. So my compassion for TM was somewhat limited by that reckless, selfish act.

But this attempt to draw in Jason's dead wife's family and essentially make them MM's saviors...the vile act of saddling Mag's grieving family with a LIE...that might help free the murderers of their grandchildren's father...this is beyond the pale!

They were trying to use a lie credited to a dead man who loved Jason...to help free his murderers! They are now trying to say to those children that it's okay that they killed Daddy...because their DEAD grandfather thought he killed their Mom!

They killed JC. The guilt should be theirs alone. But if they coached the children to lie...they also slimed guilt onto those children...pulling them into providing alibis for their Fathers murderers...telling lies about their Fathers character. Then, to add additional cover, they decide to blame Mags father for their state of mind.

What kind of people could stoop so low? Really...think this one through in all its ramifications.

The more you think about the immense cruelty of this lie...to the family if the first wife...to these children that they moan their love for...the real picture of the character of this family emerges.

This is the picture the jury needs to see. All my opinion only.
I hadn't ever thought of the TM lie in this way with regards to what it says to those poor kids. Utterly devastating. Thanks for the post.

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk
 
Mm seems to have used these kids from the start. Firstly flaunting them in NC like they were her possessions telling friends she actually gave birth to SM, they helped her create the life she could never have, also I'm sure she used their happiness as leverage with JC - would have been very difficult for him to bring those children home and away from her abuse the closer they got to her, the very nature of the man would have hated to see them upset again. They are both used again after JC death by MM in the horrific distraction from the murder that was the custody battle.

She used them again at a time when any mothers instinct would have been to surround them with family, help them grieve, NO instead she brought them for ice cream like it was any other normal day the day after their father was killed, isolated them from their father's loving family and put up disgusting posts about how they were picking out lunchboxes for school. At this time she was starting to use them as part of the poor Molly story, At this time their dad wasn't even buried.

Then for over 12 months she taunted harassed and upset Jason's family and extended family with her self serving posts, letters and pictures on social media. All the while endangering the children by sharing every detail of their lives with strangers, using them to portray her as some kind of desperate housewife when actually all she did was come across as sometimes deranged in her words.

None of it says love. None of it says mother. The kids have suffered at her hands too as well as JC and that's before we ever look at the claims made in court about her treatment of little JC. I hope her abuse of the word "mother" is not allowed continue at trial.

All my opinions only


Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk
 
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

Do you have a link where this was said? My understanding is that they were completely separate interviews. Andrea Huckabee is employed at Family Services of the Piedmont and gave evidence during the pre-trial hearing that she had attended on the children for a therapy session. Looking into the Family Services of Piedmont website it is clear that they have their own Childrens Advocacy Centres (Greensboro Children's Advocacy Centre and Hope House). Why would she refer the children to a completely separate CAC?

For completeness I had a look at the Dragonfly House website and, in particular, the list of partner agencies that they work with. Family Services of the Piedmont is not one of them; Davidson County Sheriff's Office is. This correlates with the evidence given by Detective Nathan Riggs that HE contacted Dragonfly House and arranged the appointment for the children. He did this after hearing from a colleague that the children had mentioned secret phone numbers. I have not seen anything to suggest that the interview with AH was a screening; nor would it make sense IMO that they would refer to a completely separate organisation when they clearly had the expertise to assist the children themselves.

All IMO
 
I don't know if Keith Maginn or his book can be brought up in this trial. But that book exists and will continue to exist...and the portrait it paints of the deceptive, manipulative, chaotic personality of MM...will deliver justice for Jason well beyond this trial.

The book is extraordinary because it is rare that we get a glimpse of a murderer-in-the-making. This book cannot be dismissed by those MM has deceived as being written for profit, or notoriety, or to insert oneself into a tragedy. As the book explains, the only reason it was written, long before Jason lay dead in his bedroom...was to help KM move past his own emotional scars from living with and trying to love MM. The book has long been on Amazon...just a forgotten testimonial of the havoc she brought into his life. It is stunning to read...as an insight into what Jason would face in his marriage to MM.

MM is, in my opinion. an excellent exploiter of vulnerabilities. The early pictures of her days as a Nanny are interesting as she sprawls on a bed in one photo...smiling with young SC as a prop. Her clothes are also interesting. In one, her blouse is revealingly open. Look at her FB as a tutorial in exploitation...she has discovered the vulnerabilities of the young Widower: his loneliness, his normal sexuality, and above all, his devotion to his children. JC had one other vulnerability...his goodness and his honor. Once she ensnared him sexually, he felt a duty to her. This was compounded by his fear of removing a Mother figure from his motherless children's lives.

The FB pictures show a woman indulged...indulged with trips, expensive clothes, etc. I wonder if the Martens weren't Jason's allies in trying to manage MM....maybe that's why they were carted along on vacations and a guest suite created for them. And just for discussion purposes, because this is only my humble opinion, how do we know it was MM who called her parents on that fateful weekend? Maybe JC called that he needed their help, and knowing their daughter...they immediately cancelled their plans, jumped in the car, and drove to the house to try to "manage" the situation. . Once there, they dispatched the children to a neighbors house...and tried to control their daughter...while JC removed himself and sat outside, occasionally chatting with neighbors.

In this scenario, the Martens finally think they have placated MM and as part of that process, bring the children back to the house. Jason goes to bed. The Martens believe they have handled the latest rage of their daughter and go to bed as well.

TM awakens to the sound of a "donnybrook." He rushes upstairs and finds JC on the floor being pummeled with a baseball bat by MM. He grabs the bat from her...and tries to attend to Jason. MM, runs outside and returns with the paving brick and continues her assault.

TM realizes Jason is dead...and now the coverup is constructed, all before the 911 call. TM decides to take the blame. He has no idea how long and with what maniacal rage, MM had beaten JC before he got in the scene.

It's interesting as well that MM's mother tells Jason's family the foolish lie that he died from a fall. Remember...this is a man who supposedly abused her daughter...who, according to her husband, was trying to kill her daughter. Why would she be protecting Jason by denying the donnybrook...if any of this were true?

I think the recent desperation of the "wedding warning" lie is an indication that TM is now trying to save himself. I wonder if he's realized that even if somehow they both walk free...he and his wife will never be free of MM and her chaos. Their prison will be wondering what she might do next...how long till the next murderous rage?

Just some ramblings on my part. Obviously, we don't know all the facts yet. These thoughts and scenarios are just my opinion..
 
Do you have a link where this was said? My understanding is that they were completely separate interviews. Andrea Huckabee is employed at Family Services of the Piedmont and gave evidence during the pre-trial hearing that she had attended on the children for a therapy session. Looking into the Family Services of Piedmont website it is clear that they have their own Childrens Advocacy Centres (Greensboro Children's Advocacy Centre and Hope House). Why would she refer the children to a completely separate CAC?

For completeness I had a look at the Dragonfly House website and, in particular, the list of partner agencies that they work with. Family Services of the Piedmont is not one of them; Davidson County Sheriff's Office is. This correlates with the evidence given by Detective Nathan Riggs that HE contacted Dragonfly House and arranged the appointment for the children. He did this after hearing from a colleague that the children had mentioned secret phone numbers. I have not seen anything to suggest that the interview with AH was a screening; nor would it make sense IMO that they would refer to a completely separate organisation when they clearly had the expertise to assist the children themselves.

All IMO
Interesting. Am I right in saying and I think logic lady brought it up before but is this an organisation Molly was involved with as a volunteer before Jason's death? Wasn't there a picture of her at an event. And one of her vocal supporters at the start the lawyer that works there ?







Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk
 
Do you have a link where this was said? My understanding is that they were completely separate interviews. Andrea Huckabee is employed at Family Services of the Piedmont and gave evidence during the pre-trial hearing that she had attended on the children for a therapy session. Looking into the Family Services of Piedmont website it is clear that they have their own Childrens Advocacy Centres (Greensboro Children's Advocacy Centre and Hope House). Why would she refer the children to a completely separate CAC?

For completeness I had a look at the Dragonfly House website and, in particular, the list of partner agencies that they work with. Family Services of the Piedmont is not one of them; Davidson County Sheriff's Office is. This correlates with the evidence given by Detective Nathan Riggs that HE contacted Dragonfly House and arranged the appointment for the children. He did this after hearing from a colleague that the children had mentioned secret phone numbers. I have not seen anything to suggest that the interview with AH was a screening; nor would it make sense IMO that they would refer to a completely separate organisation when they clearly had the expertise to assist the children themselves.

All IMO

Interesting. Am I right in saying and I think logic lady brought it up before but is this an organisation Molly was involved with as a volunteer before Jason's death? Wasn't there a picture of her at an event. And one of her vocal supporters at the start the lawyer that works there ?







Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

Great background info thanks emmalpage81! So are these the therapy session interviews that the defense requested? I need to have a read back through the initial motions filed. If so then surely there would be massive ambiguity as to their authenticity since there is such a tangible link between Molly & this organisation?

I do remember some of us querying initially why they were requesting records from another county!
 
Great background info thanks emmalpage81! So are these the therapy session interviews that the defense requested? I need to have a read back through the initial motions filed. If so then surely there would be massive ambiguity as to their authenticity since there is such a tangible link between Molly & this organisation?
I vaguely recall posting a link to a photo on their FB page 2015 with a group of helpers/organisers pictured at the bottom of a staircase. MM was in the photo. I'm trying to find it. It's no longer on the FB page. It is possible MM got involved with this group early on to put in the DV groundwork. Also it would have been the perfect environment to learn more about DV.
It seems to be a useful community organisation but I note any posts about DV are centred around the woman. Great for the women who genuinely suffer at the hands of an abuser. Although in this case the service may have been abused also for self serving reasons. Again reasons for seeking a Murder one charge plays on my mind?

My opinions only.

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk
 
I vaguely recall posting a link to a photo on their FB page 2015 with a group of helpers/organisers pictured at the bottom of a staircase. MM was in the photo. I'm trying to find it. It's no longer on the FB page. It is possible MM got involved with this group early on to put in the DV groundwork. Also it would have been the perfect environment to learn more about DV.
It seems to be a useful community organisation but I note any posts about DV are centred around the woman. Great for the women who genuinely suffer at the hands of an abuser. Although in this case the service may have been abused also for self serving reasons. Again reasons for seeking a Murder one charge plays on my mind?

My opinions only.

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

If Molly had been trying to build a case for divorcing Jason but retaining rights to the kids then surely this would have been a good place to start. Garnering information on what types of abuse would count as DV, having the kids attend a 'therapy session', perhaps she was in fact ultimately planning to leave him but he just beat her too it. If so I can imagine that she would have been incredibly frustrated that her plan had been foiled.

I find it sad that the kids may have been manipulated into going along with this plan however, Jack seems very conflicted 'I don't want to hurt my stepmom' ...just what had they been asked to say was going on in the home?

All MOO.
 
Let's remember that MM sought legal counsel in order to obtain a divorce and still have rights to the children. I wonder if her volunteering started shortly after that.

If the prosecution can show that essentially MM and family were "therapist-shopping" and that the change in the children's stories indicate that they were "coached"...that will show such disregard for the welfare of these children...that the "loving mother" image will be completely destroyed.

Who manipulates children to make them complicit in protecting their Fathers murderers? Who asks that children lie and demean their Fathers memory...just after they have lost him...for your own usefulness? This shows such utter disregard for their emotional wellbeing, it's almost a crime unto itself?
 
Let's remember that MM sought legal counsel in order to obtain a divorce and still have rights to the children. I wonder if her volunteering started shortly after that.

If the prosecution can show that essentially MM and family were "therapist-shopping" and that the change in the children's stories indicate that they were "coached"...that will show such disregard for the welfare of these children...that the "loving mother" image will be completely destroyed.

Who manipulates children to make them complicit in protecting their Fathers murderers? Who asks that children lie and demean their Fathers memory...just after they have lost him...for your own usefulness? This shows such utter disregard for their emotional wellbeing, it's almost a crime unto itself?

I agree completely, she should also be charged with child abuse imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I vaguely recall posting a link to a photo on their FB page 2015 with a group of helpers/organisers pictured at the bottom of a staircase. MM was in the photo. I'm trying to find it. It's no longer on the FB page. It is possible MM got involved with this group early on to put in the DV groundwork. Also it would have been the perfect environment to learn more about DV.
It seems to be a useful community organisation but I note any posts about DV are centred around the woman. Great for the women who genuinely suffer at the hands of an abuser. Although in this case the service may have been abused also for self serving reasons. Again reasons for seeking a Murder one charge plays on my mind?

My opinions only.

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

She was involved in a fundraising event for the Guild of Family Services for High Point, i never thought to check the connection between them and the Family Services of Piedmont. They are connected. Had another look at AH it seems she is the Family Preservation Program Manager/Therapist at the organisation. Could it be that MM organised this therapy session to assist her in the custody matter not realising that the records could be looked at for the criminal case? Hence no talk of the violence on the part of JC?

Truthalways well spotted on the link between the two!

All IMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
91
Guests online
2,028
Total visitors
2,119

Forum statistics

Threads
601,793
Messages
18,129,956
Members
231,145
Latest member
alicat3
Back
Top