GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #7

[kittythehare]

As this image indicates, the fingertips don't necessarily touch the bat when a person grips it. I can see how it would be hard to get prints. Also, if there were prints, then there might be a lot of them because a lot of people (kids, Jason, people in the store where it was purchased, etc. ) might have gripped the bat previously.

I agree that someone, esp. TM might have wiped the bat and made it harder to identify prints. But as someone noted, the probable motive for TM to wipe the bat would be to wipe MM's prints from the bat.

The wiping the bat clean of prints scenario presumes that MM was the primary assailant of Jason. It's possible, but I find that theory less likely. Given the extreme nature of Jason's injuries, it seems more likely that the main assailant was TM.

He had the size, the strength and the experience of a typical American male in wielding a bat. MM has probably never picked up a bat in her life. I believe she participated in the beating (maybe she started it with the paving brick), but I think only a man like TM could have inflicted the kind of extreme injuries that ultimately killed Jason.

In sum, the issue of a lack of fingerprints on the bat doesn't seem to be that important. The defense basically concedes that TM and MM killed Jason by beating him. The important issue is whether the defense can convince a jury that they did it in self defense. I don't think so, but there is along way to go in this trial.

That is not the right bat though, bat used had markings allegedly.

 

[stephanddoody]

I just want to add and I don't disagree but Molly is not the weak defenceless lady she is being portrayed. She's wearing a jacket in court everyday . She has strong arms . She does kickboxing and swimming . She's athletic not skinny there is a huge difference.IMO she is also agile and could easily have out run Jason and defended herself if necessary. They showed the picture of the drinks on the table for a rason IMO . Long after Jason went to bed Molly stayed up drinking. The no prints on the bat is very telling IMO . I believe she has the strength the motive and most of all the sense entitlement that was given to her by her parents . When Tracy takes the stand I'm sure she will be asked about when Molly confessed to her

"I spoke to Molly after the event and her mother. And Molly indicated that she killed my brother," Ms Lynch testified.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.ind...her-husbands-killing-court-told-34345784.html

 

[stmarysmead]

As this image indicates, the fingertips don't tightly touch the bat when a person grips it. I can see how it would be hard to get prints. Also, if there were prints, then there might be a lot of them because a lot of people (kids, Jason, people in the store where it was purchased, etc. ) might have gripped the bat previously.

I agree that someone, esp. TM might have wiped the bat and made it harder to identify prints. But as someone noted, the probable motive for TM to wipe the bat would be to wipe MM's prints from the bat.

The wiping the bat clean of prints scenario presumes that MM was the primary assailant of Jason. It's possible, but I find that theory less likely. Given the extreme nature of Jason's injuries, it seems more likely that the main assailant was TM.

He had the size, the strength and the experience of a typical American male in wielding a bat. MM has probably never picked up a bat in her life. I believe she participated in the beating (maybe she started it with the paving brick), but I think only a man like TM could have inflicted the kind of extreme injuries that ultimately killed Jason.

In sum, the issue of a lack of fingerprints on the bat doesn't seem to be that important. The defense basically concedes that TM and MM killed Jason by beating him. The important issue is whether the defense can convince a jury that they did it in self defense. I don't think so, but there is along way to go in this trial.

Good points, but I also have to disagree. There is too much rage in this killing, this annihilation. Tom's own attorney said he was looking forward to golfing with his son-in-law the next day. He said that allegedly seeing JC with his hands on MM's neck was the "last thing" he expected to see. There's no build up of animus here.

Even if I take those statements as half lies, i see TM, as his job would require him to be, as a very controlled individual. I think he might have hit Jason in the circumstances, he described, but I think he would have stopped. Not to mention, his FBI training afforded him other avenues to subdue JC.

The beat-down in that room was so horrific that a juror had to vomit, that seasoned EMT professionals stated "It's bad."

There was a total loss of control in this killing...at some point it became
...joyous...to the killer, too satisfying to the killer's rage to stop. The blood on the floorboards really is chilling. The print of the man's head is on the wall but the killer swings so maniacly that the killer can't even hit an unconscious object. The killer hits and dents the wall instead.

Then brings the bat down and down again.

Layers of fractures "any ONE of which would have rendered Jason unconscious." Think of that. That's rage.

I don't see that kind of rage, that kind of killing from a professional Federal agent with the best training our nation can provide.

I do see that kind of killing from a bipolar woman mixing alcohol with her meds, a woman whose rages and mania and depression are chronicled in a book for sale on Amazon by a previous fiancé. A woman who felt she was about to lose everything if this creature underneath her bloody bat, and beneath her crushing paving stone...lived another day.

My opinion only, of course.

 

[kittythehare]

nothing new here
http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...-kill-corbett-are-shown-to-jury-35987751.html

 

[jd08]

Fingerprints are really irrelevant. Although many people think that every object should have prints, it is actually very difficult to get identifiable prints off of objects that people touch for a number of reasons. The bat is an example. I suppose that the prosecution was trying to create some kind of inference that TM wore gloves or did something that would have concealed prints.

It seems that the defense is attacking the thoroughness of the investigation. Why didn't the officer test this or that, such as the dried blood on Molly or the strands of hair in Jason's hand. This is classic defense strategy aimed at discrediting a police investigation as being one sided. I will say that it sometimes works but it really depends on the demeanor of the officer and how well he connects with the jury as to whether they will disregard certain things that he may not have done.

I still think this case is make or break with TM's testimony. As a jury member, I would want to know why there was seemingly overkill.

 

[Mom2catieandtwins]

The Defense is seeking to put any kind of doubt, any question, in the minds of the jurors. That's all normal tactics. IMO the "tissue matter" on MM pajamas is very bad for the Defense. As the Prosecution says, why didn't they stop? IMO Why didn't they flee?

Photos shown in court show the blood splatter on the back of the bedroom door. Who closed the door? Did TM enter and fear for Molly's life and then close the door? Why didn't he advice her to run? Why was that door closed? The defense wants us to believe it was a matter of life or death for TM and Molly. Who closed the door? Why did Molly not run? Check on Jason's children? Check on her mother? Why when TM reported on the 911 call he hit Jason, during that hit why did Molly not call 911? Why did Sharon not come upstairs? While the house appears large, it sits closely to the road. How did Sharon not hear the ambulance, fire truck and police? So many whys. But what strikes me most is in the mist of the "donney brook" why did Molly not run. That is if Molly and TM are telling the truth.

 

[jd08]

Photos shown in court show the blood splatter on the back of the bedroom door. Who closed the door? Did TM enter and fear for Molly's life and then close the door? Why didn't he advice her to run? Why was that door closed? The defense wants us to believe it was a matter of life or death for TM and Molly. Who closed the door? Why did Molly not run? Check on Jason's children? Check on her mother? Why when TM reported on the 911 call he hit Jason, during that hit why did Molly not call 911? Why did Sharon not come upstairs? While the house appears large, it sits closely to the road. How did Sharon not hear the ambulance, fire truck and police? So many whys. But what strikes me most is in the mist of the "donney brook" why did Molly not run. That is if Molly and TM are telling the truth.

How do you perceive the defense in this case? Very little is being reported on cross-examination questions. Are they making any good points or anything that might cause doubt about what happened?

 

[kittythehare]

Photos shown in court show the blood splatter on the back of the bedroom door. Who closed the door? Did TM enter and fear for Molly's life and then close the door? Why didn't he advice her to run? Why was that door closed? The defense wants us to believe it was a matter of life or death for TM and Molly. Who closed the door? Why did Molly not run? Check on Jason's children? Check on her mother? Why when TM reported on the 911 call he hit Jason, during that hit why did Molly not call 911? Why did Sharon not come upstairs? While the house appears large, it sits closely to the road. How did Sharon not hear the ambulance, fire truck and police? So many whys. But what strikes me most is in the mist of the "donney brook" why did Molly not run. That is if Molly and TM are telling the truth.

Back of door shows door was closed while Jason was being attacked.

This supports theory that MM may have carried out the attack and then called her father, some time later..?

 

[kittythehare]

Fingerprints are really irrelevant. Although many people think that every object should have prints, it is actually very difficult to get identifiable prints off of objects that people touch for a number of reasons. The bat is an example. I suppose that the prosecution was trying to create some kind of inference that TM wore gloves or did something that would have concealed prints.

It seems that the defense is attacking the thoroughness of the investigation. Why didn't the officer test this or that, such as the dried blood on Molly or the strands of hair in Jason's hand. This is classic defense strategy aimed at discrediting a police investigation as being one sided. I will say that it sometimes works but it really depends on the demeanor of the officer and how well he connects with the jury as to whether they will disregard certain things that he may not have done.

I still think this case is make or break with TM's testimony. As a jury member, I would want to know why there was seemingly overkill.

See #282 below, Stephendoddy..
it appears crime scene was altered in other ways too. Apologies should have read #278 by same member

 

[CaptRenault]

Good points, but I also have to disagree. There is too much rage in this killing, this annihilation. Tom's own attorney said he was looking forward to golfing with his son-in-law the next day. He said that allegedly seeing JC with his hands on MM's neck was the "last thing" he expected to see. There's no build up of animus here...
I don't see that kind of rage, that kind of killing from a professional Federal agent with the best training our nation can provide.

I do see that kind of killing from a bipolar woman mixing alcohol with her meds, a woman whose rages and mania and depression are chronicled in a book for sale on Amazon by a previous fiancé. A woman who felt she was about to lose everything if this creature underneath her bloody bat, and beneath her crushing paving stone...lived another day.

My opinion only, of course.

Those are very good points. I agree that it's possible that MM rather than TM wielded the bat and she was the primary assailant. It' also possible that TM heard the beating, saw what happened and decided to concoct a cover story for MM.

However, if that's the case, then she must have started the assault when Jason was sleeping. I don't think that MM was physically capable of picking up a bat and/or a brick during a typical marital argument and beating her husband to death. Jason could have defended himself if he had been awake. She must have stunned and hurt him badly while he was asleep and then finished the assault after he tried to get up and defend himself. Yes, I will concede that such a scenario is possible. I agree that her background makes it seem even more possible.

All this his makes me wonder to what extent does the prosecution need to convince the jury of exactly how the murder unfolded. Does the prosecution need to convince the jury of a particular scenario or just that a murder was committed by MM and TM with a bat and a brick and the details of who delivered the blows and when don't matter that much?

 

[Mom2catieandtwins]

How do you perceive the defense in this case? Very little is being reported on cross-examination questions. Are they making any good points or anything that might cause doubt about what happened?

This is all my personal opinion and how I perceive information, but I feel TM's attorneys are working harder. I haven't been in court for many questions asked by Molly's attorneys. I feel they are trying to prove the case was not investigated properly. . They do object a lot. Knowing the case a little, I feel it's when the Prosecution makes a valid statement or asked a valid question. In my humble opinion the Prosecution is doing a good job of presenting facts. The defense is looking for holes. Today it was about some blood stains not being tested. Molly and TM had not one open cut or injury. They were not bleeding.

 

[kittythehare]

Those are very good points. I agree that it's possible that MM rather than TM wielded the bat and she was the primary assailant. It' also possible that TM heard the beating, saw what happened and decided to concoct a cover story for MM.

However, if that's the case, then she must have started the assault when Jason was sleeping. I don't think that MM was physically capable of picking up a bat and/or a brick during a typical marital argument and beating her husband to death. Jason could have defended himself if he had been awake. She must have stunned and hurt him badly while he was asleep and then finished the assault after he tried to get up and defend himself. Yes, I will concede that such a scenario is possible. I agree that her background makes it seem even more possible.

All this his makes me wonder to what extent does the prosecution need to convince the jury of exactly how the murder unfolded. Does the prosecution need to convince the jury of a particular scenario or just that a murder was committed with a bat and a brick and the details of who delivered the blows and when don't matter that much?

Theres much more to come.
this is merely the scene the police discovered.
Defence claim the homicide was in self defence and defence of others.
I imagine prosecution is showing proof that an unconscious man did not require that his be brain pulverised and his skull crushed as a method of self defence.

 

[Mom2catieandtwins]

Back of door shows door was closed while Jason was being attacked.

This supports theory that MM may have carried out the attack and then called her father, some time later..?

The question still stands, why did TM close the door behind him. I hope the jury asked themselves these questions.

 

[kittythehare]

The question still stands, why did TM close the door behind him. I hope the jury asked themselves these questions.

Maybe molly carried out entire attack with door closed.
TM came to room after JC was dead.

 

[CaptRenault]

I would characterize the defense strategy so far as the "OJ Defense Strategy." In other words, try to show that the investigators did not perform their investigation perfectly and the evidence is not perfect, so therefore the defendants are not guilty. Raise any reasonable doubt about any piece of evidence or any witness and so convince just a few jurors that it was self defense.

 

[jd08]

This is all my personal opinion and how I perceive information, but I feel TM's attorneys are working harder. I haven't been in court for many questions asked by Molly's attorneys. I feel they are trying to prove the case was not investigated properly. . They do object a lot. Knowing the case a little, I feel it's when the Prosecution makes a valid statement or asked a valid question. In my humble opinion the Prosecution is doing a good job of presenting facts. The defense is looking for holes. Today it was about some blood stains not being tested. Molly and TM had not one open cut or injury. They were not bleeding.

Thank you. Sounds like classic defense strategy of find 4 or 5 minor things and then rattle them off at the end in closing to argue that the police didn't do their job.

 

[jd08]

The question still stands, why did TM close the door behind him. I hope the jury asked themselves these questions.

Or why was he sleeping in a collared shirt and a watch. Seems odd, but again his likely testimony is going to be crucial.

 

[Mom2catieandtwins]

Or why was he sleeping in a collared shirt and a watch. Seems odd, but again his likely testimony is going to be crucial.

Do people sleep in collared shirts and watches? He was in underwear. Did he stop to outbid on a shirt? Or was he just starting to undress for bed? Or did he remove his shorts after the beating?

 

[jd08]

Do people sleep in collared shirts and watches? He was in underwear. Did he stop to outbid on a shirt? Or was he just starting to undress for bed? Or did he remove his shorts after the beating?

I don't know anyone that wears a collared shirt and watch to bed. I think everyone was up fairly late that night, but the call didn't go to 911 until after 3 am IIRC. I guess it possible he was getting ready for bed that late. Did he put that stuff on before the police got there? Of course there is the issue of when JC actually died because of the cool body.

 

[kittythehare]

http://www.journalnow.com/news/crime/no-fingerprints- on-baseball-bat-used-to-hit-jason-corbett/article_361c2e42-183a-57ca-aed5-2738bf94129c.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share