GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #8

[Be true]

Yes we need transcripts or at least good reliable relay of info. He was on the stand for 3 hours and we only have a handful of questions/answers it's frustrating.

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

Does anyone know if court transcripts available from the court itself to the public?

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

 

[DaleTray]

I don't believe there was a threat. Certainly there was no threat after he landed two or three blows to the head. If police shoot two shots and you are down, they are not allowed to empty their gun in the suspect until he's dead.

Remember Jason's head sliding down that wall....

Agreed, I also don't think there was a threat. I was just merely stating I think TM had a readied answer if in case he was asked about continuing the assault. If prosec had asked TM, he had a ready answer. But, if prosecutor offers their theory during closings, TM won't be able to offer a retaliation response

 

[irishmartin]

IRISH DAILY MAIL (digital subscription)
VERBAL VOLLEY OF CASE PROSECUTOR
https://www.facebook.com/TheIrishMail/



I must have missed the fact that TM is or was also an attorney. That explains a lot.

FBI was established by Edgar Hoover to be an organization of non-rookie cops that was to be left for the local police forces but of elite professional’s law graduates, a super law enforcement body. I’m sure it was a prerequisite to be a law graduate when TM was recruited. I think it’s more common to now find law, criminology and all other graduates to computer science. That’s why it the leading agency in pursuing international computer crime offenses not only in the US but all over the world where the US has extradition agreements. Examples of that making the news is their closing of notorious web sites as “silk road” and “freedom hosting” the latter site being linked to an FBI extradition request presently taking place in Ireland and more recently that of Marcus Hutchin the UK hacker arrested on US visit this week.

 

[irishmartin]

I think it was a big big mistake to put TM on the stand, far too smug, doesn’t see himself on trial for a horrific crime, no contrition for the crime, doesn’t see there is a victim, did nothing to assist the victim when he killed him and used lethal force in situation that didn’t warren it and he accepts he was trained how to use a weapon for non-lethal force. He in fact comes across as a law enforcer with a bragging attitude in a case that had no personal connection to him on duty taking on a superior force. If he was my client my advice would be to appear normal and definitely not to show any condescending attitude, forget your law enforcement past and legal training and relate to the joe soaps of the jury of your being just like them. Going on TM evidence he himself states there was not an immediate threat to MM in there was not a knife being held to her throat or firearm and no prior violence by JC. As a former law enforcement officer one of the first duties in such a situation is to raise the alarm and then try to contain the situation. He has agreed to ulterior motive (1) he didn’t like JC, don’t know if the jury heard of the as****** comment he is alleged to have made about JC but its damming if they did and (2) the C kids, the fact is he has admitted he was annoyed that JC did not give adoption rights of his kids to MM. Along with the total non-involvement of SM it comes across as a script, starting with their unscheduled visit being written by a calculating devious heartless individual. One can’t conclude on the latter it’s an open declaration of war for MM to get the C kids with benefits and JC was the obstacle to this. The trial judge has an important duty in charging the jury of the fulcrum of the defense that of what constitutes “self-defense” and what it’s not and what it is and it’s for them to judge in this case was the force used proportional to the threat and also was there an actual threat using the information that made available at the trial. Still confused of the Life Assurance policies and to who was made beneficiary a few days before his death. Was the beneficiaries of these named in court for the jury?

 

[stmarysmead]

I'm not sure TM is trying to take the fall for MM. I no longer feel he is that emotionally invested in his daughter...if he ever was.

Since I believe that he is an easy liar, I was puzzled at his denial of DV. Why not throw MM a lifeline? In the opening statement, before his hatred was revealed by witnesses, his lawyer seemed to be suggesting that he and JC weregolfing buddies! "Hey, lets visit ole Jason, Molly and the kids.Fun times ahead."

He never visited his daughter in four years. He wasn't happy with her choice of husband, though, in fact...it was MM who "married up." Her husband was an executive...TM one of a group of agents, never having climbed the ladder of success much in the FBI. He even had to take money from this rowdy son-in-law so he could host a wedding to impress his friends...which he alone could not afford.

I don't think TM was too thrilled with the chaos that MM brought into his life. I think he'd been angry about MM involving her Mother in her issues...and then SM would drag him in. I bet it was SM that insisted they drive down. SM probably wanted him to fix MM's marriage because...if not...she's back in their laps again.

I don't think there even needed to be a big dramatic trigger that night. I think TM had been seething for a long time over lots of issues. It could be something as simple as their arguing woke him up after a long weary drive...and he grabbed the bat, furious and tired. "I'll put a stop to this or I'll call the cops!"

He walks in, slams JC in the back of the head....just keeps going and MM in her fury...joins the beatdown.

NO dramatic motive. Just a self important, fed-up, tired old man...losing it. And his bipolar daughter joining in.

Now he's out for himself on the stand. The things he can't remember serve his purpose as well as hers. But he wasnt going to help her out on DV.

He may want her convicted. The State can deal with her then.

 

[kittythehare]

I'm not sure TM is trying to take the fall for MM. I no longer feel he is that emotionally invested in his daughter...if he ever was.

Since I believe that he is an easy liar, I was puzzled at his denial of DV. Why not throw MM a lifeline? In the opening statement, before his hatred was revealed by witnesses, his lawyer seemed to be suggesting that he and JC weregolfing buddies! "Hey, lets visit ole Jason, Molly and the kids.Fun times ahead."

He never visited his daughter in four years. He wasn't happy with her choice of husband, though, in fact...it was MM who "married up." Her husband was an executive...TM one of a group of agents, never having climbed the ladder of success much in the FBI. He even had to take money from this rowdy son-in-law so he could host a wedding to impress his friends...which he alone could not afford.

I don't think TM was too thrilled with the chaos that MM brought into his life. I think he'd been angry about MM involving her Mother in her issues...and then SM would drag him in. I bet it was SM that insisted they drive down. SM probably wanted him to fix MM's marriage be abuse if not...she's back in their laps again.

I don't think there even needed to be a big dramatic trigger that night. I think TM had been seething for a long time over lots of issues. It could be something as simple as their arguing woke him up after a long weary drive...and he grabbed the bat, furious and tired. "I'll put a stop to this or I'll call the cops!"

He walks in, slams JC in the back of the head....just keeps going and MM in her fury...joins the beatdown.

NO dramatic motive. Just a self important, fed-up, tired old man...losing it. And his bipolar daughter joining in.

Now he's out for himself on the stand. The things he can't remember serve his purpose as well as hers. But he wasnt going to help her out on DV.

He may want her convicted. The State can deal with her then.

I think the reason he did not support it is clear.
It would have gone a long way to proving pre-meditation- a hit.

I think he went there with the sole purpose of assassinating JC, and for no other reason,
Either that or she was planning to stage a DV scenario with witnesses present.
Having read whats available of his performance and nuances yesterday, I now believe the former more than the latter.

Having said that, I do not know which of them inflicted the blows or whether both were present in the room at the time of the murder.

I also do not know whether SM was present and contributed physically to the attack.

Either way, I really dont want to see any of them free to walk the streets again.

 

[SandyQLS]

...RSBM...

In relation to ‘baton training’ he had received, he was asked to identify which parts of the body should be struck to ‘bring a man down’.

He said the ankle, the knees or the kidneys. The prosecution contended that a baseball bat is similar to a baton and should have been used in that way.....

https://www.facebook.com/TheIrishMail/posts/1941723026085239

That is a good point the prosecution made getting him to admit that his training was to strike the ankle, knee or kidneys (back). Americans are very familiar with videos of police beatings from Rodney King to various riots and car chases. They know that the police are not supposed to beat someone's skull until it is smashed into his brains. IMO TM's police training works against him. JC was a naked man in his own home in his own bedroom in the middle of the night with no history of violence or drugs or arrests. And TM knows the law both by his education and work history, so he really has no excuse for his actions going so far beyond self defense.

 

[SandyQLS]

Does anyone know if court transcripts available from the court itself to the public?

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

Yes they do produce written transcripts of court proceedings and the public can pay a fee to acquire them. Unfortunately, they are not usually produced and available concurrent with the trial but at some later date after the trial concludes.

 

[Angelswatchingover]

I think it was a big big mistake to put TM on the stand, far too smug, doesn’t see himself on trial for a horrific crime, no contrition for the crime, doesn’t see there is a victim, did nothing to assist the victim when he killed him and used lethal force in situation that didn’t warren it and he accepts he was trained how to use a weapon for non-lethal force. He in fact comes across as a law enforcer with a bragging attitude in a case that had no personal connection to him on duty taking on a superior force. If he was my client my advice would be to appear normal and definitely not to show any condescending attitude, forget your law enforcement past and legal training and relate to the joe soaps of the jury of your being just like them. Going on TM evidence he himself states there was not an immediate threat to MM in there was not a knife being held to her throat or firearm and no prior violence by JC. As a former law enforcement officer one of the first duties in such a situation is to raise the alarm and then try to contain the situation. He has agreed to ulterior motive (1) he didn’t like JC, don’t know if the jury heard of the as****** comment he is alleged to have made about JC but its damming if they did and (2) the C kids, the fact is he has admitted he was annoyed that JC did not give adoption rights of his kids to MM. Along with the total non-involvement of SM it comes across as a script, starting with their unscheduled visit being written by a calculating devious heartless individual. One can’t conclude on the latter it’s an open declaration of war for MM to get the C kids with benefits and JC was the obstacle to this. The trial judge has an important duty in charging the jury of the fulcrum of the defense that of what constitutes “self-defense” and what it’s not and what it is and it’s for them to judge in this case was the force used proportional to the threat and also was there an actual threat using the information that made available at the trial. Still confused of the Life Assurance policies and to who was made beneficiary a few days before his death. Was the beneficiaries of these named in court for the jury?

Yes it was changed shortly beforehand and Molly was made the sole beneficiary....Jason was a great father, can't see how he would not have his children on that Life insurance policy, or maybe they had been and taken off few days before hand? You can update and change all policies online now..

 

[TeaTime]

I know nothing about this case but am wondering how many people keep a landscape paver in the master bedroom.

I think she drugged his cocktail(s) with her RX tranquilizers that she just got and hit him over the head with the landscape paver when he fell asleep. He woke and was fighting her off when dad, who just arrived for his first visit in 4 years, rushed in with the BB bat he just so happened to have with him in the guest room. Dad continued to beat the man until he was dead. And, I think it was for the $600K insurance and it was planned and mom knew what was going down, which is why she didn't leave the guest room or call 911 on any of the 4 cell phones at her disposal.

JMHO

 

[kittythehare]

Yes it was changed shortly beforehand and Molly was made the sole beneficiary....Jason was a great father, can't see how he would not have his children on that Life insurance policy, or maybe they had been and taken off few days before hand? You can update and change all policies online now..

was there any proof it was jason who changed it himself?

This makes no sense at all..

If he did, he may have signed his own death warrant.
He knew her by then,, to be a greed grabber

I dont believe he would have made this change.

Were there any copies of it online with dates?

 

[Logic-lady]

Martens said that Molly’s body went from “wiggling” to “limp” in Jason’s choke hold as he dragged her toward the master bathroom. Mr. Martens said he stayed close so that Mr. Corbett could not close the bathroom door and leave him outside of the room.

Is this guy serious? "Wiggling" to limp" if she was limp would she have not fell to the ground when released ?
When jason let go of her her father says she shouted "don't hit my dad" and retreated to the bedside wall ??

Was she limp tm or was she shouting and retreating and by the way he is saying she was "limp going down the hallway so by the time she came back up the hallway in the headlock, j wrestled tm for bat, TM fell on the floor would she not be dead? TM might think he is clever and educated but imo his testimony makes him look dumb

http://www.wxii12.com/article/defendant-thomas-martens-takes-the-stand-in-murder-trial/11557306



Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

Also, if Molly had gone limp and Jason was nearly in the bathroom why would he suddenly change tack and start to attack TM? Why not just get to the bathroom, close the door and finish the job? Why fight two people when you have the source of your ire limp in your arms and you are nearly in a place of relative safety from an aggressor with a bat?

 

[kittythehare]

I know nothing about this case but am wondering how many people keep a landscape paver in the master bedroom.

I think she drugged his cocktail(s) with her RX tranquilizers that she just got and hit him over the head with the landscape paver when he fell asleep. He woke and was fighting her off when dad, who just arrived for his first visit in 4 years, rushed in with the BB bat he just so happened to have with him in the guest room. Dad continued to beat the man until he was dead. And, I think it was for the $600K insurance and it was planned and mom knew what was going down, which is why she didn't leave the guest room or call 911 on any of the 4 cell phones at her disposal.

JMHO

The 4 years reference was to her time in Ireland, pre 2011.

He and her mother had been frequent visitors to Jc home, takers of free hospitality, anything they could take- vultures comes to mind.

The amount of traz in his toxicology suggested a very low dose remained after half life calculations are taken into account.

BUT, she could well have administered several doses of the drug throughout the day in his drinks which would have made him very sleepy at bedtime and posts referring to descriptions of crime scene photos from the court suggested that only one side of the bed had been slept on.

It looks like he went to bed relatively early, probably shortly after picking up the children at 11pm and she stayed up drinking, possibly alone or in the company of her parents.

The 911 call suggests JC did not join in family drinking and finished drinking with his friend quite early in the evening.
I am not sure whether she hit him first with the bat or the paver. I think its likely that he was attacked while in bed alone,

 

[Angelswatchingover]

was there any proof it was jason who changed it himself?

This makes no sense at all..

If he did, he may have signed his own death warrant.
He knew her by then,, to be a greed grabber

I dont believe he would have made this change.

Were there any copies of it online with dates?

I don't know Kitty, but the defence stopped the lead detective from talking about it on the stand , saying they only found out about it.and that she gained the information falsely, it was on Thursday this. Information came out, everyone picked up on the 600000 policy but not on the fact she said it was changed only few days before hand, I will go back over reports

 

[Be true]

Also, if Molly had gone limp and Jason was nearly in the bathroom why would he suddenly change tack and start to attack TM? Why not just get to the bathroom, close the door and finish the job? Why fight two people when you have the source of your ire limp in your arms and you are nearly in a place of relative safety from an aggressor with a bat?

Yes LL true and what exactly are we expected to imagine was to happen if Jc had killed mm,tm next? Then sm? Then j just calls the police and hands himself in leaving the kids? Or takes off with the kids leaving everything behind?

Tm and mm seem to judge Jc by their own standards and there is no way he would have jepordised his life with the children he adored just to strangle mm. Or rough up tm. IMO he was getting away from her and this strange family, pity he didn't get out of that bedroom door that night and to safety.

Jmo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[irishmartin]

Yes it was changed shortly beforehand and Molly was made the sole beneficiary....Jason was a great father, can't see how he would not have his children on that Life insurance policy, or maybe they had been and taken off few days before hand? You can update and change all policies online now..

I find that incredulous and does not tie into the JC that emerged since his death of wanting to move on with his life and his kids without MM. It’s even more incredulous that he was to be brutally murdered 2 days after changing the beneficiary and this to be one of his killers. From what I’m aware of Life Assurance Companies keep strict controls and procedures for changing this and they have a prescribed form that must be completed hardcopy with signatures and witness. Any idea of the previous beneficiary? As for his kids being beneficiaries this often has complications because being minors the trust would have to come under the Wards of Court with the Courts appointing a trustee to administer the trust for the minor beneficiaries till of age of majority. I’m sure the police have investigated this as its usually their first stream of investigation and from what I saw in the trial there is some dispute on such but not sufficient to be allowed into evidence. But the whole thing of change of beneficiary and 2 days is very suspect and the coincidence of his killing.

 

[Angelswatchingover]

You would have to have a password to go online into your account and make changes to your policies, I know in my house my husband would not know any off the passwords to any of our policies, life insurance, house insurance, car insurance, I manage it all, a lot of wives do!!!!insurance company than would send out a hard copy of updated policy, whoever is at home gets the post!!!

 

[kittythehare]

I don't know Kitty, but the defence stopped the lead detective from talking about it on the stand , saying they only found out about it.and that she gained the information falsely, it was on Thursday this. Information came out, everyone picked up on the 600000 policy but not on the fact she said it was changed only few days before hand, I will go back over reports

Thanks Angel,
Can police now get somebody else from the company interviewed and investigated?

This is really odd , that the agency would even discuss it with the defence is strange particularly as the policy has been through the courts in the past via Shipwash..

Policy should have been flagged bigtime with a murder investigation ongoing!

In fact from the outset the LE should have been given automatic rights to freeze and collect any and all policies..
This is very strange indeed, thanks for clarifying it, I always had assumed the change referred to one of his very many other policies, that this was safe.

I hope LE keep exploring..

 

[Logic-lady]

I really feel after reading today's coverage of the testimony from TM that the jury have been left with more questions than answers. What I can't decide is whether the defense have played a very clever game. By purposefully not putting Molly on the stand they have avoided referencing a motive for the fight, just ensured that the jury heard from TM that he needed to finish it. By excluding the information regarding the insurance policy and the statements from JC's colleagues about the strained relationship and possible move home, the jury are left with horrific overkill but no motive behind the fight...

I really hope the prosecution can convince the jury that when the testimony they have heard doesn't add up, they should consider this to be grounds enough for a conviction.

 

[kittythehare]

I really feel after reading today's coverage of the testimony from TM that the jury have been left with more questions than answers. What I can't decide is whether the defense have played a very clever game. By purposefully not putting Molly on the stand they have avoided referencing a motive for the fight, just ensured that the jury heard from TM that he needed to finish it. By excluding the information regarding the insurance policy and the statements from JC's colleagues about the strained relationship and possible move home, the jury are left with horrific overkill but no motive behind the fight...

I really hope the prosecution can convince the jury that when the testimony they have heard doesn't add up, they should consider this to be grounds enough for a conviction.

Defence has not rested yet, they are only half way through was my impression?