GUILTY NC - Laura Ackerson, 27, Kinston, 13 July 2011 #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
AnonymousD said:
Morning all :)

NCEast, were you awakened by some serious thunderstorms this morning? It rattled the windows in our house!
Click to expand...

Good morning! Not storming here yet but it's definitely on the way. I woke throwing up this morning....migraine will follow. It must be one heck of a storm to rattle your windows. My windows are almost 200 years old so they rattle and creak in a light breeze :)
Dang, I know I want this jury to get it right and my heart says to give them all the time they need. But I want to hear 'guilty of 1st degree murder' this morning!
I hope everybody is well out there in sleuther land!
 
And we jump right to the "Deliberating" sign... :waiting:
 
Anyone have a contact in the courtroom who could tell us if the jury dressed up extra special for today?
 
AnonymousD said:
Morning all :)

NCEast, were you awakened by some serious thunderstorms this morning? It rattled the windows in our house!
Click to expand...


My DH couldn't believe I slept through it last night -- the thunder woke him up, but I apparently heard nothing. And we had some rain -- no idea how much. It's 55 degrees in borndem's backyard right now, and no snow is forecast for today, so jurors should have a whole day if they need it. We'll see...

:seeya:And a Good Verdict Morning to All, especially our Laura! :seeya:​
 
borndem said:
If you were on the jury, aa, and you felt strongly about it being a M1 crime, would you back down to M2 so as not to have a possible mistrial?

I have never seriously thought about it, I guess. Hmmm. That's a tuff one. I would hate to walk out there as a juror as part of a mistrial, but I would also hate not to mete out to the perpetrator what she deserves. I really hope that's not where they are. Yes, I do worry.
Click to expand...

No, I wouldn't dilute what I believed the person was guilty of. I would stick to my guns and debate it with the person/s who thought differently.

Common sense tells me Amanda was in on the murder when rugs vanished and the place started reeking of bleach and the sound of a reciprocating saw were hard to fall asleep to. bs. she was in on it from the start.
 
Good morning everyone!!! I made a quick trip to Harris Teeter for Super Doubles early this morning! Cat chow and cat litter are BOGO--yay! With three kitties, I need all the help I can get!

I'm really thinking today's the day. I've got that buzzy-fuzzy verdict feeling...
 
Madeleine74 said:
I think there might be a couple people who cannot wrap their head around this qualifying as a Murder 1 (or even possibly Murder 2) crime. Some people, despite what the law says and despite a judge's instructions, might believe a person can only be guilty of murder if they 'pull the trigger,' so to speak, or hire someone to do the murder for them. I don't know if anyone on this jury thinks that way, but it's not impossible. "Acting in Concert" in combination with the charge of murder 1 might be confusing.

Here we don't know exactly who did what and in my mind they are equally culpable, and that's what the law says too, but these charges have some subtle shades of gray within.

Lay people are the ones who are tasked with interpreting the sometimes esoteric language of the law without detailed guidance. Lawyers spend years studying and exploring the nuances of the laws but then a group of 12 non-lawyers are stuck in a room, trying to figure it out.
Click to expand...

Morning all.

I do think Boz and/or Becky could have done a better job describing how they get to M1.
 
I talked to my DH last night about the Skil saw as he works with one generally every day to cut through metal pipes (plumber). I told him where she was dismembered and asked him how long it would take to do it. He said less than 30 minutes.
 
otto said:
When did a day of jury deliberations translate to jury failure?

Impatience has no place in law.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying, Otto. But IMO, there is a problem in the jury room. It takes sometimes 15 hours or so for juries to come to verdict on cases where they really is a thin line b/w whether or not there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the person did it or not. Where they really have to figure a lot of stuff out.

This has already been what - 8 hours or so? - and it is pretty obvious IMO that she was involved in some way in the death and subsequent acts.

Also, Grant Haye's jury took 1.5 hours. They also supposedly had not discussed the case before they got into deliberations. Yes, there are a couple more videos of him. There are also videos of Amanda.

JMO.
 
CUCKOOHEAD said:
Maybe it was a teenie tiny ukelele to make Grant look bigger?
Click to expand...

I believe this is how he would look with a "normal" sized guitar...:floorlaugh:

article-2308487-19425046000005DC-140_634x604.jpg
 
borndem said:
Good points, Madeleine -- Another thing that is frustrating to me when the judge is giving the jury instructions -- the judge cannot give examples of what "malice," for instance, mean. He/she cannot say, "It's like when someone......," etc. Or "Acting in concert might be when....." and examples could really help so much, IMO, and apparently the statutes won't allow it. Or if the jury submits a note asking to explain what _________ is -- the judge really can't elaborate any more than has already been said. "Malice" (which is not a big factor here) is a particularly pesky adjective for jurors -- they can't get beyond ill-will and spite, but it's more than that legally.

And "Acting in concert" is not an everyday term, even in the courtroom. Oh, well.
Click to expand...

Yes, Boz and Becky should have explained all of that in their closings. IIRC, Boz said, I'm just gonna go through these (instructions) real fast. And he talks fast anyway!

Ah, I know it's easy for us to say. But well, I'm sayin' it anyway.

THey should have broken it down exactly like I believe it was Madeleine above did: that if you believe this or this, then that is M1, acting in concert, etc.. Broken it all down. This is M1. This is M2. He could have given examples. I don't know. SOme kind of graph thing on PowerPoint would have helped.
 
Just getting here this AM. Have there been anymore questions since the Skil saw stuff?

Thanks muchly.
 
Crap...my thanks button isn't working any better today.

Thank you all so much for sharing your thoughts!!
 
borndem said:
My DH couldn't believe I slept through it last night -- the thunder woke him up, but I apparently heard nothing. And we had some rain -- no idea how much. It's 55 degrees in borndem's backyard right now, and no snow is forecast for today, so jurors should have a whole day if they need it. We'll see...

:seeya:And a Good Verdict Morning to All, especially our Laura! :seeya:​
Click to expand...

I didnt sleep through it !!!! i have two dogs that r deathly afraid of thunderstorms!!!! They kept me awake all night!!!!! :tantrum: They both just woke up! UGH!
 
borndem said:
If you were on the jury, aa, and you felt strongly about it being a M1 crime, would you back down to M2 so as not to have a possible mistrial?

I have never seriously thought about it, I guess. Hmmm. That's a tuff one. I would hate to walk out there as a juror as part of a mistrial, but I would also hate not to mete out to the perpetrator what she deserves. I really hope that's not where they are. Yes, I do worry.
Click to expand...

Well, I can't predict exactly what I would do, but what I think I would do is no, not back down. I would think, well there are one or two coo-koo's on this jury who happened to get on here somehow. The next jury won't have coo-koo's on it.

Now, if there were something like 5 jurors thinking the other way, then yes I think I would try to get to some middle ground, if they could not be convinced. Maybe M2, but not lower.

I don't know, though, hard to tell what you would do in that same situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 104 more.
Total: 394 (members: 105, guests: 289)

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
289
Total visitors
394
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,903
Messages
18,247,512
Members
234,498
Latest member
hanjging
Back
Top