stmarysmead
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,302
- Reaction score
- 16,923
No, I'm exploring the possibility of it being a bruise or not. Thomas Martins himself said he was the main perpetrator acting in defense of another. That's what there is to disprove.
If you can show that TM "attacked the naked man in his sleep" then you solved the crime. Hopefully you have evidence to Prove he was killed in his sleep. Should that not be the case, it's unlikely the jury will hear that theory because the prosecution is bound to stick to disproving self defense.
I don't believe that extraneous theories can be introduced "on the fly". Same thing with additional charges for the jury to consider at the time of instructions. Perhaps the NC lawyer would be willing to clarify?
In the closing statements, the DA could weave a narrative, a storyline. He can suggest to the jury that they ask themselves certain questions. "You may ask yourself why Jason had a drug in his system that was prescribed to his wife. We can't answer that question for you...but it's a puzzle. You may ask yourself why Sharon Martens never came upstairs. You may ask yourself why Molly and her Father had not a scratch on them. As you consider the hard evidence of the horrific beatdown we HAVE given you, these are puzzles you may consider as you deliberate."
Today we may hear one or both opening narratives. Prayers for the Corbett/Lynch families as they sit through this.