GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #5

[stmarysmead]

I don't know of too many golf gloves that would survive the abrasive brick. Besides, if she stopped to put on gloves in order to strike him, wouldn't that be First Degree Murder?

The force from the brick went down into Jason's skin not UP to her gloved hands.

No. She gathered the gloves with her weapons. Though I agree with your reasoning ..it should be first degree murder.

 

[emmalpage81]

You can bet that if the Jury Questionnaire asks about domestic violence, then its about domestic violence, at least some of it. But also, I believe it's defined in the law as "all in the family" when a crime such as this occurs; or relationship between defendant and victim. IMO Not all of it is smoke and mirrors, some of it is the law.

Absolutely, agree, but the jury will be asked to consider, based on the evience whom out of MM and JC was the victim. A women who had no injuries or a man whose brain matter ended up on his bedroom walls

All IMO.

 

[kittythehare]

I am feeling I have missed a whole chapter here. I just never even saw it until I saw it mentioned by several people since thread re-opened.
Thats the 'hidden phone' story.
I saw posts about hidden notes discovered in strange places among the childrens' things.
I'm unclear where the hidden phone story emerged or when or who discovered it.
What age were the children exactly when their dad was murdered?

 

[emmalpage81]

I am feeling I have missed a whole chapter here. I just never even saw it until I saw it mentioned by several people since thread re-opened.
Thats the 'hidden phone' story.
I saw posts about hidden notes discovered in strange places among the childrens' things.
I'm unclear where the hidden phone story emerged or when or who discovered it.
What age were the children exactly when their dad was murdered?

Sorry Kitty the children explained to law enforcement that they had been given a secret phone number to contact TM and SM. This is why the LE wanted them interviewed.

If my recollection is correct they were 8 and 10.

All IMO

 

[Oregonmama]

Hoping a pysch eval was done on MM. It is also interesting that Dad handled the outbursts when MM had them. So many things can be said about that but I will hold off . Its a tragedy all around; children have lost both parents (JC and the biological mom) , the trial.......

 

[Be true]

I go back to this statement from Greg Brown, the attorney representing the state of North Carolina in the case,

said the crime was especially ‘heinous, atrocious and cruel’.

Read more:*http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-plead-not-guilty-murder.html#ixzz4nDUJnote*
Follow us:*@MailOnline on Twitter*|*DailyMail on Facebook

Henious

odious,*wicked,*evil,*atrocious,*monstrous,*disgraceful,*abominable,*detestable,*contemptible,*reprehensible,*despicable,*horrible,*horrific,*horrifying,*terrible,*awful,*abhorrent,*loathsome,*outrageous,*shocking,*shameful,*hateful,*hideous,*unspeakable,*unpardonable,*unforgivable,*inexcusable,*execrable,*ghastly,*iniquitous,*villainous,*nefarious,*beneath contempt,*beyond the pale;*

Atrocious

horrifyingly wicked."atrocious cruelties"
synonyms:brutal,*barbaric,*barbarous,*brutish,*savage,*vicious,*wicked,*cruel,*nasty,*ruthless,*merciless,*villainous,*murderous,*heinous,*nefarious,*monstrous,*base,*low,*low-down,*vile,*inhuman,*infernal,*dark,*black,*black-hearted,*fiendish,*hellish,*diabolical,*ghastly,*horrible

Cruel

wilfully causing pain or suffering to others, or feeling no concern about it.
"people who are*cruel to*animals"
synonyms:brutal,*savage,*inhuman,*barbaric,*barbarous,*brutish,*bloodthirsty,*murderous,*homicidal,*cut-throat,*vicious,*ferocious,*fierce;

This statement was made from the attorney who we would presume early on would have seen pictures of JC body and the scene, he also presumably would have had the witness accounts from LE who were on the scene.

This is how he chose to describe all that. Makes me wonder, when the evidence of the scene starts to come to light, when we thought the autopsy was brutal, is there worse to come.

Just thinkin out loud, my opinions only




Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

 

[kittythehare]

Re heinous atrocious and cruel.. the words exist as legal definitions too and its in one of the past threads because I remember having the discussion and looking it up.

 

[emmalpage81]

Re heinous atrocious and cruel.. the words exist as legal definitions too and its in one of the past threads because I remember having the discussion and looking it up.

Which ties in with self defence only being allowable as long as there is no excessive force. This whole case is excessive force.

All IMO

 

[searchinGirl]

I've often thought that Jason's son told the therapist that HE was abused by Molly. We have heard a very alarming story about MM practically water boarding the child because he splashed her.

I hope Jack talked about it in his interview. I for one, would like to know more about what he has to say about that. But maybe we will never hear it. IDK You can't "un-ring" the bell, meaning Molly can't be denied her right to confront her accuser like admitting the Skype interview would do. In the Dragonfly House interviews the children didn't accuse anyone of a crime that I know of, and there may be parts of them that are not allowed. In fact, the children were probably held harmless from anything they said.

I may be wrong, but if any child tells a health care professional that he/she has been abused, it is manditory that it be reported to authorities and investigated. IMO

 

[emmalpage81]

I hope Jack talked about it in his interview. I for one, would like to know more about what he has to say about that. But maybe we will never hear it. IDK You can't "un-ring" the bell, meaning Molly can't be denied her right to confront her accuser like admitting the Skype interview would do. In the Dragonfly House interviews the children didn't accuse anyone of a crime that I know of, and there may be parts of them that are not allowed. In fact, the children were probably held harmless from anything they said.

I may be wrong, but if any child tells a health care professional that he/she has been abused, it is manditory that it be reported to authorities and investigated. IMO

I'm sorry, I dont mean to disagree with every statement but you are completely disregarding the initial interview. You say that you want JC to talk about his experience but completely disregard his initial interview as well as his recantation. The children are not going to be giving evidence. This has been made clear by their guardians who wish to protect them from this procedure.

The question of whether the children stated there was abuse is not the big question, the question is whether they were coerced and whether they have been recanted. The Judge has to give weight to this. JC has recanted his statement. If it is put before the jury his original statement and recantation should be also.

All IMO

 

[Electric Sheep]

I am feeling I have missed a whole chapter here. I just never even saw it until I saw it mentioned by several people since thread re-opened.
Thats the 'hidden phone' story.
I saw posts about hidden notes discovered in strange places among the childrens' things.
I'm unclear where the hidden phone story emerged or when or who discovered it.
What age were the children exactly when their dad was murdered?

I believe it was a hidden phone number, not a hidden phone.

 

[Be true]

Could I suggest that unless the children are brought into trial which suggestions are they won't be, that we all as a group come to a consensus to make them off limits. They aren't on trial and have been through so very much. They are orphaned children and their guardian's also requested they not be brought into social media or any media for that matter. Perhaps we can collectively respect yheir wishes. I say this sincerely.

It's only a thought but maybe we too can respect that. What do you think?


Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

 

[Electric Sheep]

The question of whether the children stated there was abuse is not the big question, the question is whether they were coerced and whether they have been recanted.

And, of course, whether the recantation was coerced.

 

[searchinGirl]

The force from the brick went down into Jason's skin not UP to her gloved hands.

No. She gathered the gloves with her weapons. Though I agree with your reasoning ..it should be first degree murder.

Her hands would have been a force upon the brick and would be scraped up. I'm sure of it. But, if both of their hands were as pristine as we have been led to believe, then I truly believe that is suspicious. IMO

 

[emmalpage81]

Could I suggest that unless the children are brought into trial which suggestions are they won't be, that we all as a group come to a consensus to make them off limits. They aren't on trial and have been through so very much. They are orphaned and their guardian's also requested they not be brought into social media or any media for that matter. I say this sincerely.

It's only a thought but maybe we too can respect that. What do you think?


Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

The children will not be giving evidence unless the defence plan on calling them. Both the DA and the guardian's have said this for over a year. Unfortunately whilst this issue continues they will be kept in the media spotlight. I truly believe the defence know these statements will not be admitted and had hoped to taint the jury pool.

All IMO

 

[emmalpage81]

And, of course, whether the recantation was coerced.

True but given his first interview - whilst in the care of MM and her family - stated he had negative feelings towards her. This to me is important

All IMO

 

[emmalpage81]

Her hands would have been a force upon the brick and would be scraped up. I'm sure of it. But, if both of their hands were as pristine as we have been led to believe, then I truly believe that is suspicious. IMO

And this would be a defence if she had not already confessed to striking him.

All IMO

 

[searchinGirl]

Which ties in with self defence only being allowable as long as there is no excessive force. This whole case is excessive force.

All IMO

I think the jury first has to consider self defense. If they find it was justified in self defense but excessive force was used, then they can convict of manslaughter. If they find it was not self defense, then they convict on Second Degree Murder. IMO

 

[kittythehare]

Which ties in with self defence only being allowable as long as there is no excessive force. This whole case is excessive force.

All IMO

Gosh.. I dont know what I expected, was up all night working on something entirely different, so did Indo article was first I saw and thinking.. this is surely not the entire defence.. a dV case. Its a murder case, is it not? The autopsy concluded- homicide.
The job of the trial is to examine that, is it not?
Heinous, atrocious and cruel are not lightly used by LE.

Jason is the victim here.
There are allegations without truth being discussed as fact.
I think Marymead first used the expression where she described home-executions as unlawful, no matter what the provocation.

The truth is that we dont actually know the motive behind this homicide.
The court /police investigation will answer those questions.
They had access to all records, we did not.
Right now it looks to me that DV is given precedence over murder.

Should we quit speculation, await the truth?
I never watched or participated in a trial hearing on WS.
My impression of what we're meant to be doing is reporting back from trial and discussing?

I still do not understand why vol mansl was removed, If the term was superfluous to begin with why was it ever there?
I had no luck searching it out either, I didn't find precedence, but thats not saying its not there.

 

[searchinGirl]

And this would be a defence if she had not already confessed to striking him.

All IMO

But you don't know what she confessed to for sure. Putting on gloves is evidence of pre-meditation. IMO