GUILTY NC - Laura Ackerson, 27, Kinston, 13 July 2011 #7

[otto]

A lot of instability in Amanda's childhood and Grant's. In testimony, it sounded as if Amanda skipped over her father, just stating that her mother was "single", until her mother married her stepfather. So besides the marriages, there could have been additional relationships. You've broken down the years pretty well here.

Amanda testified that when she spoke with her brother regarding their mother's death, he was shocked that she had no money. And she was angry while in jail when she didn't receive something from her mother's estate; maybe she wanted her family to pawn the jewelry she gave her mother and send her the money.

Amanda seemed to have inherited the pattern of moving Sha around to different relatives, too. Hopefully, she can break that pattern if she recognizes it. In my opinion, Amanda used Sha to her advantage as well. I can't relate, as a mother, to leaving my young child for such long periods of time, while pursuing my dreams. I just couldn't do it. Sha seemed much more mature than Amanda.

The husbands listed sound right to me. Perhaps she had some relationships after she became a rich widow. I wonder really how long would she have stayed married to NS, had he lived. I wonder if he was her true love, or just a convenient attraction for the money.

Her whole testimony was matter of fact. She described the trip to Texas as just your average vacation. I think the only reason they were stressed out on the way back to NC was because they knew the police were onto them. Sha had called, told them about being picked up by the police. The Raleigh police department were hot on their trail and they knew it. It wasn't going to go as smoothly as the planned.

When Sha says that the hutch came from the house where she grew up, she's thinking about the time between living with Karen (until age 4) and Amanda marrying the irrigation man (up until Amanda was 32? when Sha was 15 years old?). Amanda said that when she was married to the irrigation man, she spent her life travelling with him. Where was Sha at the time? Was Sha about 15 years old when that father died? ... and Amanda put her in a Catholic school in NYC? At 16, did she live with Karen, or was there some deal about living in the VI if she finished grade 10, or was it grade 12 ... junior year? It sounds like Amanda was suddenly living out her version of a "Queen" (not a Princess). I can't imagine what his family is thinking about how much of their inheritance was lost to her ... but I'll bet that she missed the jackpot.

I think that Amanda was vicious towards her daughter. When Amanda announced that she was visiting Karen for a few days and Sha asked to be included (Karen, with whom Sha spent her early childhood) Amanda told her to "quit being so selfish". That is not what should be said by a mother when a child asks to come along for a visit with the matriarch of the family (which is what Karen was to both Amanda and Sha).

Amanda rented a three bedroom apartment in Manhattan, trying to stake her claim in a rich pocket book. She failed. Someone probably told her there might be better pickings of older gentleman in the VI, so she posed as an artist

Sha gave them a head's up while they were driving home? I'm guessing that this was after the happy hotel photo.

That child looks terrified ... is that the one that Grant says witnessed his mother's murder?

 

[otto]

Just wow. You should write the book on this case! All of your impressions are what I was thinking, but you really articulate them perfectly. I also think the move to NYC was to get Grant away from St. John, because wasn't Laura down there with him part of the time? She pretended to never have seen Laura in St. John, but I think she's lying.

She must have also lured Grant with her money. I can't get over how stupid Amanda was with her money. And a single woman telling someone she really doesn't know how much money she has in the bank is asking for problems.

It sounds like she knew that Laura was taking Grant's son off the Island for medical treatment, but she apparently mistakenly thought that it was the environment that was bad for him ... instead, it was a birth defect. She admitted that she knew that much about Laura. Amanda also made a big production about believing that Grant was single. Laura was told that Amanda was a business investor, so there definitely was a cross over where Grant was apparently spending time with both Laura and Amanda at the same time.

It sounds like Amanda was going nuts because Grant and Laura were in constant contact, to the extent that she got an extra phone labelled "children's phone" that Grant was supposed to use if he needed to contact Laura about the children. I wonder if she cooked that up with the last family she had ... the children of the irrigation husband ... a special phone that he was allowed to use with his children but not for the "wife".

Clearly, she knowingly lured Grant with money, but she was fully expecting that she was going to cash in. It was like a double con and Laura was the casualty. There's no way that Amanda was going to let Grant have a full life if she was going to be a daycare employee renting a house owned by his parents while he took off. She was going to solve the problem by eliminating Laura ... the person that she held responsible for her custody dispute costs, her financial desperation and her financial stupidity.

 

[otto]

Yep, the big inconsistencies in her story; her luv for GH throughout; her opportunities to flee and/or contact LE but didn't; her knowing about the crime before, during & after it occurred; all she did to help....

And -- accessory after the fact to 1st murder is thus, according to the NC General Statutes:

§ 14-7. Accessories after the fact; trial and punishment. If any person shall become an accessory after the fact to any felony, whether the same be a felony at common law or by virtue of any statute made, or to be made, such person shall be guilty of a crime, and may be indicted and convicted together with the principal felon, or after the conviction of the principal felon, or may be indicted and convicted for such crime whether the principal felon shall or shall not have been previously convicted, or shall or shall not be amenable to justice. Unless a different classification is expressly stated, that person shall be punished for an offense that is two classes lower than the felony the principal felon committed, except that an accessory after the fact to a Class A or Class B1 felony is a Class C felony, an accessory after the fact to a Class B2 felony is a Class D felony, an accessory after the fact to a Class H felony is a Class 1 misdemeanor, and an accessory after the fact to a Class I felony is a Class 2 misdemeanor. The offense of such person may be inquired of, tried, determined and punished by any court which shall have jurisdiction of the principal felon, in the same manner as if the act, by reason whereof such person shall have become an accessory, had been committed at the same place as the principal felony, although such act may have been committed without the limits of the State; and in case the principal felony shall have been committed within the body of any county, and the act by reason whereof any person shall have become accessory shall have been committed within the body of any other county, the offense of such person guilty of a felony as aforesaid may be inquired of, tried, determined, and punished in either of said counties: Provided, that no person who shall be once duly tried for such felony shall be again indicted or tried for the same offense. (1797, c. 485, s. 1, P.R.; 1852, c. 58; R.C., c. 34, s. 54; Code, s. 978; Rev., s. 3289; C.S., s. 4177; 1979, c. 760, s. 5; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 47; 1981, c. 63, s. 1; c. 179, s. 14; 1997-443, s. 19.25(p).)




rbm



http://www.ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_14/gs_14-7.html

A Class C felony is no big deal, as was said earlier. LA has no existing record, ergo no felony points. Even if she is found by the Judge to be Aggravated, the Statutes state that punishment would be 73--92 months as I read the Sentencing Guidelines.

Now accessory before the fact is a different breed of dog:

§ 14-5.2. Accessory before fact punishable as principal felon. All distinctions between accessories before the fact and principals to the commission of a felony are abolished. Every person who heretofore would have been guilty as an accessory before the fact to any felony shall be guilty and punishable as a principal to that felony. However, if a person who heretofore would have been guilty and punishable as an accessory before the fact is convicted of a capital felony, and the jury finds that his conviction was based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of one or more principals, coconspirators, or accessories to the crime, he shall be guilty of a Class B2 felony. (1981, c. 686, s. 1; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 22, s. 6.)




http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-5.2.html


rbm

i.e., bummer for the lady's Life.

Will the conviction be for before, or after, the fact?

After the fact seems a given, before the fact is the question. Did she cook this up with Grant in NYC while she swooned to The Broomstick Rider, or was this spontaneous anger that erupted moments after learning that for another $25k, Grant could have full custody (I don't believe that the custody letter is authentic) and then Amanda and the children could live/work/rent at his parent's daycare while Grant pursued his career ... just like Laura before her.

 

[otto]

Odd that Amanda gave Grant $50,000 to establish Grant Haze Ltd. All that money went poof, and not a penny in return. Absolutely nothing accomplished.

However, once on her feet, Laura worked and accomplished so much in that one year, so impressive. She and Chavon had the menu business going well, and she was starting her own graphic design business. That poor girl worked her hind end off, so extremely sad how this ended for her. All she wanted were her own babies.

I'm bothered that these two murdering fiends get to see pictures of those precious little children, whose lives are going to be so scarred at what Grant and Amanda did to Laura.

She testified that he thought his cell phone cases would generate 99¢ each (that's an app price, not a case price) and he believed they would have a million $$$ in no time. Did he think that people would pay to have his graphics as a background for apps? What was he selling for 99¢? Financially, she was taken for a fool. In terms of vindictive retaliation, he probably didn't see it coming ... even though he rambled about it in his rap song.

For Laura, the difference was that she put her energy into herself and building her own career instead of Grant's imaginings of grandeur ... and it was working for Laura.

I'm bothered that Grant's parents have the children.

 

[otto]

I totally agree that the FBI was wrong. LA would never have signed this agreement. It was meant to provide an explanation for Laura disappearing as GH thought his plan for getting rid of LA was infallible. He totally believed that her body would never be found & that he could explain her disappearance with this signed agreement that Laura gave up her kids for money. He thought no one would ever realize that he had no way to pay her $25000. I believe GH is evil, evil, evil. I think his mom's comment about teacher jealousy was very revealing about how she sees her son. IMO, she enabled his thinking that nothing was ever his fault. He blamed LA for the situation he found himself in. I believe AH told many lies on the stand but I believe her opinion of LA came from what GH told her about LA. He was really her only source of information about LA & he convinced her that LA was a bad mom & that her only motivation was money ( which is interesting because I don't believe he was paying child support & had no money for LA to try to get!) I think the "agreement" proves premeditation on GH's part. It us difficult to believe that AH didn't know about the agreement ahead of time as, it would gave required time to get it written, but just not sure how jury sees it. Hope the closing for the PT is very strong & ties it all together. Hoping for justice for LA.

I think so too. The forged letter was intended to be presented after they returned from Texas. I think that Amanda assumed that no one would notice Laura missing until much later (reminds me of Meredith Kercher in Perugia - the murderers didn't expect that anyone would notice her missing so they made up stories about a dinner party), and then they would simply produce the letter and claim that Amanda ran away in shame with her $25,000.

I think that Amanda is behind the plan to ensure that Laura's body never be found in the alligator creek behind her sister's house. Grant didn't know the place existed until Amanda mentioned it.

The jealousy remark from Grant's mother suggested to me that when Grant was a teenage child, his mother perceived his teachers as having the hots for him, and competing with her and female classmates for his attention. In her mind, teachers were jealous of the female children in his classroom that got his attention but she is his mom and could always have his full attention. I think that Grant's mom is nuts and that she should not be around children due to her distorted perception of reality. I think Grant's father brought forth the letter from Amanda to salvage their son's reputation. Amanda portrayed him as a controlling lunatic freak that was going to get on the mother ship with aliens. Apparently that didn't sit well with his father, so he proved that she loved him before and after the murder. That testimony was supported by the officer that arrested them (affectionate after the murder) and the prisoner that spent time in jail as a thief.

There were two handwriting samples in the letter purportedly signed by Laura Ackerson, and it sounds like the samples have not been authenticated. The very existence of the letter in two handwriting samples, without authentication, suggests pre-meditation by two persons. I don't for a minute believe that Laura was going to give up on her children for a pocket full of money. Testimony from the custody assessment made it clear that Laura was getting on her feet financially and that the children were her only priority.

Neither of the two hand-writing samples on the money for children letter were matched to Laura ... did Grant have two writing styles, or were there two people, excluding Laura, that wrote the letter?

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Grrr... dentist and oral surgeon have kept me from a bit of this trial. I'm all caught up on the testimony, although I can't be sure I heard all of Amanda's. I heard quite a bit, quite enough to "know" what she's about.

Kudos to the wonderful posters who have spelled it all out above!

I should be able to listen live until 11:30. I hope the jury instructions come AFTER the closings! I'll read here to catch what I missed and join you on verdict watch while I listen to what I miss.

Amanda is one strange duck. She couldn't hold on to her "fortune" even without Grant. In fact, I have to wonder if it was a fortune. For her, $189,000 might have seemed like one and that's the only figure I've seen bandied about. Even with jewelry, property, and other possessions, money only goes so far when it is going out and not coming in. Amanda never heard of a rainy day.

 

[04009margaret]

I won't be able to stay up tonight to watch closing arguments live, my granddaughter is staying the night so that means morning school run or me. My prayers go to the PT that they lay everything thing out clearly, I hope they have a very strong closing argument. My prayers also go to the jury, let them have the strength to see the truth & lastly "Justtice for Laura".

 

[atthelake]

Assume no trial today due to the holiday? Is that correct and what time do they start tomorrow?


Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[04009margaret]

Note to self, don't type in the dark lol

 

[Ann-Tx]

Assume no trial today due to the holiday? Is that correct and what time do they start tomorrow?


Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

No holiday today for Wake County, NC courts.

Closing arguments are scheduled for today. Two hours allowed for the Defense; 2 hours allowed for the State.

 

[Ann-Tx]

[URL]http://www.wral.com/closing-arguments-set-for-amanda-hayes-murder-trial/13400869/[/URL]

WRAL - Raleigh, NC -- 2/17/14

Closing arguments set for Amanda Hayes murder trial

Posted 5:00 a.m. today - 2/17/14
Updated 5:39 a.m. today - 2/17/14

Snipped:

Jurors in Amanda Hayes' trial will potentially deliberate six verdicts.

On the charge of murder, they can consider guilty verdicts of first-degree murder or second-degree murder, as well as not guilty.

If she is found not guilty of murder, the jury must then consider accessory after the fact to murder in both the first-degree and second-degree or not guilty.

 

[SurfieTX]

Wes Wolfe ‏@WolfeReports 48m

Closing statements in Amanda Hayes trial today. Don't expect anything new, but case should go to jury after lunch. #ackerson

 

[Ann-Tx]

When court is in session, you can watch the "live" stream here.

http://www.wral.com/news/video/13331969/
WRAL - Raleigh, NC -- Amanda Hayes trial -- "live" stream


http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/livenow?id=9408820
WTVD - Raleigh, NC -- Amanda Hayes trial -- "live" stream


It is my understanding WAT will also "live" stream.

 

[Ann-Tx]

Surfie, I checked Ed Crump (reporter - WTVD) and Amanda Lamb (reporter - WRAL) - Raleigh, NC on Twitter and they are not tweeting yet.

Looks like Wes Wolfe is the only reporter tweeting so far.

Time to rise and shine, Ed and Amanda. Today is a big day in the Amanda Hayes trial!

 

[NCB]

Good morning, all! Closings start at 9:30, yes?

 

[CarolinaMoon]

I sure hope so!

 

[Chelly]

Good morning WS Friends!

Glad to be joining you for last day of testimony and closing arguments!

 

[SurfieTX]

Kelly's awake! LOL

Kelly Gardner (WRAL) ‏@wralKellyG 1m

Closing arguments expected this morning in the murder trial of #AmandaHayes. Full coverage available at http://www.wral.com/13400869/

 

[borndem]

Will the conviction be for before, or after, the fact?

After the fact seems a given, before the fact is the question. Did she cook this up with Grant in NYC while she swooned to The Broomstick Rider, or was this spontaneous anger that erupted moments after learning that for another $25k, Grant could have full custody (I don't believe that the custody letter is authentic) and then Amanda and the children could live/work/rent at his parent's daycare while Grant pursued his career ... just like Laura before her.

IIRC, it's only AFTER, otto. But I thought I'd throw in the "before" charge just to show the huge difference in sentence.

Good Morning, All :seeya:

 

[NCB]

And we're up!