NC vs. Raven Abaroa ~ the Trial 3

[thefragile7393]

Geez defense sounds like one of my kids pouting...

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

 

[L L & S]

Yep, the laptop reported missing from the crime scene was an HP Laptop, IIRC.

And Raven just happened to back it up to discs the day before or the morning of the murder. Besides the laptop, what was the only other thing missing or as Raven said.... stolen .... from the crime scene that night? A knife? Someone help me here please. My brain is mush this morning.

 

[borndem]

And Raven just happened to back it up to discs the day before or the morning of the murder. Besides the laptop, what was the only other thing missing or as Raven said.... stolen .... from the crime scene that night? A knife? Someone help me here please. My brain is mush this morning.

Yes, L L & S, your mushy brain (we love your mushy brain, btw) is right!

RA said that his laptop and his knife collection were missing (typical shades of "All about Me"). But not her wedding/engagement rings nor anything else that would be easy to pick up & run with...

Odd, huh?? And such a pity for RA.

 

[guera]

They're reading this transcript in front of the jury, right?

 

[geevee]

They're reading this transcript in front of the jury, right?

Yes, jury is in, when did Raven testify?

 

[guera]

It referred to Theresa Pressley, who was the previous DA on the case - I'm guessing last October, when the trial was originally scheduled??

 

[borndem]

Yes, jury is in, when did Raven testify?

Prelim in prior go-round (not trial) of this thing, perhaps?

 

[geevee]

It referred to Theresa Pressley, who was the previous DA on the case - I'm guessing last October, when the trial was originally scheduled??

Okay, thanks.

 

[geevee]

:drama:
​

Yes, geevee -- It will be interesting to see how much more emphasis he'll put on WS.

Further, even if some poster was blasting (as much as it is allowed w/o being deleted by Mods and TO, or worse, given) the Defense or telling what the Def thinks might be untruths, SO WHAT??

As we all know, within the bounds of good taste and other rules/terms of conduct on here -- that are certainly enforced :gomods: -- a poster can voice an opinion or a theory or a question or answer for other posters. WS does not have a built-in polygraph :liar: machine to check for purposeful mis-information or faulty recall of an incident or an article. What's the big flippin' deal here?

And one more thang: If people hear WS mentioned during this case, and join to just spread lies or inflammatory stmts or venom, etc., etc., it WILL be dealt with ASAP. :whip:

That's why a lot of us have been on this forum for years.:websleuther:

Mini-rant ends....:rant:

Hiya BD :seeya:, as often as this guy brings up WS it seems he must have a point to make about it, sure hope he delivers it in closing, it ought to be pretty rich.

 

[borndem]

Well, geevee, I wanna hear it -- and even if it's factual and absolutely the truth, again, what's the big deal? As long as the jury isn't reading it, it's fine, IMO.

Is someone from the DT putting it on WS? I think that was done on one case we have discussed here and watched together. The DT definitely had some folks on WS. Someone from the PT on WS? Is there a...... OMG.... a leak ....? Telling secrets of the DT? Shhhh, shhhh. Oh that would never do. Not very likely, IMO.

No matter what his point, it is a tempest in a teapot, much ado about nothing, and he's just emphasizing it too much -- or is he doing a "Please don't throw me in the briar patch" trip on us -- wanting people to go out there and read it? Hmmmmm. It will bite him either way. It's harmless and should be disregarded. But you have to smile a little...

Posters who have been on WS for a while are usually responsible posters, or they would not stay with WS -- they would go to a less-monitored forum. He's got it wrong, wrong, wrong, IMO.

 

[geevee]

Well, geevee, I wanna hear it -- and even if it's factual and absolutely the truth, again, what's the big deal? As long as the jury isn't reading it, it's fine, IMO.

Is someone from the DT putting it on WS? I think that was done on one case we have discussed here and watched together. The DT definitely had some folks on WS. Someone from the PT on WS? Is there a...... OMG.... a leak ....? Telling secrets of the DT? Shhhh, shhhh. Oh that would never do. Not very likely, IMO.

No matter what his point, it is a tempest in a teapot, much ado about nothing, and he's just emphasizing it too much -- or is he doing a "Please don't throw me in the briar patch" trip on us -- wanting people to go out there and read it? Hmmmmm. It will bite him either way. It's harmless and should be disregarded. But you have to smile a little...

Posters who have been on WS for a while are usually responsible posters, or they would not stay with WS -- they would go to a less-monitored forum. He's got it wrong, wrong, wrong, IMO.

BBM

Yes, you surely do.

I guess they went to lunch? I'm making some rugelach dough and missed the last 20 minutes of jury looking over the evidence. Haven't made these cookies in ages but hub likes nutty things (myself being a prime example. lol)

 

[Moxie]

I am amazed that Amos Tyndall is still throwing out questions about WS. To me it seems that he is throwing it out there as a Red Herring, to confuse the jury, because Mr. Tyndall's client, Raven, isn't really giving his DT much to work with in terms of proving his innocence.

Or just that his client, Raven, is completely obsessed with WS himself, b/c Raven didn't count on there being a well-moderated crime following/fact sharing/idea sharing/crime solving site when he planned out Janet's murder. A website that would pick up on him, and begin discussing all the disparities in his stories and behavior. I've been on this site for years, and most of what I've read on Mr. Abaroa has been factually based. It's frightening, but factual.

The scary thing to me is Raven Abaroa's obsession with the posters at Web Sleuths, his threat to kill at least one of the posters, and the fact that he even stated (in the creepy video chat with himself, shown at this trial) that once he got the life insurance money from Janet's death, he would spend most of it trying to take WS down. That was funny, because really Raven? You would spend several hundred thousand dollars to lose a first amendment battle?? Truthfully though, it was sad. All Raven can think about is the people who are posting true things about his life, his character, his behavior and his choices.

Not once has Raven said, wow - I want to use that insurance money to find who killed Janet. Because whoever did kill her has made my life a living hell. And he hasn't said that because no one else killed Janet - Raven killed her. He has made his own life a living hell.

 

[seattlechiquita]

I am amazed that Amos Tyndall is still throwing out questions about WS. To me it seems that he is throwing it out there as a Red Herring, to confuse the jury, because Mr. Tyndall's client, Raven, isn't really giving his DT much to work with in terms of proving his innocence.

Or just that his client, Raven, is completely obsessed with WS himself, b/c Raven didn't count on there being a well-moderated crime following/fact sharing/idea sharing/crime solving site when he planned out Janet's murder. A website that would pick up on him, and begin discussing all the disparities in his stories and behavior. I've been on this site for years, and most of what I've read on Mr. Abaroa has been factually based. It's frightening, but factual.

The scary thing to me is Raven Abaroa's obsession with the posters at Web Sleuths, his threat to kill at least one of the posters, and the fact that he even stated (in the creepy video chat with himself, shown at this trial) that once he got the life insurance money from Janet's death, he would spend most of it trying to take WS down. That was funny, because really Raven? You would spend several hundred thousand dollars to lose a first amendment battle?? Truthfully though, it was sad. All Raven can think about is the people who are posting true things about his life, his character, his behavior and his choices.

Not once has Raven said, wow - I want to use that insurance money to find who killed Janet. Because whoever did kill her has made my life a living hell. And he hasn't said that because no one else killed Janet - Raven killed her. He has made his own life a living hell.

BBM

Dude.Wait. WHAT? He did that? wowza. :scared:

 

[borndem]

I am amazed that Amos Tyndall is still throwing out questions about WS. To me it seems that he is throwing it out there as a Red Herring, to confuse the jury, because Mr. Tyndall's client, Raven, isn't really giving his DT much to work with in terms of proving his innocence.

Or just that his client, Raven, is completely obsessed with WS himself, b/c Raven didn't count on there being a well-moderated crime following/fact sharing/idea sharing/crime solving site when he planned out Janet's murder. A website that would pick up on him, and begin discussing all the disparities in his stories and behavior. I've been on this site for years, and most of what I've read on Mr. Abaroa has been factually based. It's frightening, but factual.

The scary thing to me is Raven Abaroa's obsession with the posters at Web Sleuths, his threat to kill at least one of the posters, and the fact that he even stated (in the creepy video chat with himself, shown at this trial) that once he got the life insurance money from Janet's death, he would spend most of it trying to take WS down. That was funny, because really Raven? You would spend several hundred thousand dollars to lose a first amendment battle?? Truthfully though, it was sad. All Raven can think about is the people who are posting true things about his life, his character, his behavior and his choices.

Not once has Raven said, wow - I want to use that insurance money to find who killed Janet. Because whoever did kill her has made my life a living hell. And he hasn't said that because no one else killed Janet - Raven killed her. He has made his own life a living hell.

:goodpost:
​

 

[L L & S]

I am amazed that Amos Tyndall is still throwing out questions about WS. To me it seems that he is throwing it out there as a Red Herring, to confuse the jury, because Mr. Tyndall's client, Raven, isn't really giving his DT much to work with in terms of proving his innocence.

Or just that his client, Raven, is completely obsessed with WS himself, b/c Raven didn't count on there being a well-moderated crime following/fact sharing/idea sharing/crime solving site when he planned out Janet's murder. A website that would pick up on him, and begin discussing all the disparities in his stories and behavior. I've been on this site for years, and most of what I've read on Mr. Abaroa has been factually based. It's frightening, but factual.

The scary thing to me is Raven Abaroa's obsession with the posters at Web Sleuths, his threat to kill at least one of the posters, and the fact that he even stated (in the creepy video chat with himself, shown at this trial) that once he got the life insurance money from Janet's death, he would spend most of it trying to take WS down. That was funny, because really Raven? You would spend several hundred thousand dollars to lose a first amendment battle?? Truthfully though, it was sad. All Raven can think about is the people who are posting true things about his life, his character, his behavior and his choices.

Not once has Raven said, wow - I want to use that insurance money to find who killed Janet. Because whoever did kill her has made my life a living hell. And he hasn't said that because no one else killed Janet - Raven killed her. He has made his own life a living hell.

In that video, he talks about needing to win the lottery, about $3 million dollars, and he would use 3/4 of it to fight WS and as an after thought he said he would use the rest of the money to set his son up with a home and money for his education. But most of it would go to fight the slanderous and libel stuff written about him on the internet, meaning WS. I'm not sure how he thinks that would work.... if he spent any time on other forums, high profile forums, he would see a whole lot worse opinions and speculation regarding say.... Casey Anthony et al, Jodi Arias et al, Scott Peterson, Drew Petereson, Jason Young, not to mention Jon Benet Ramsey and all of that speculation and opinions and sleuthing over the years.... well you get my drift.... just about any other murder/missing persons case and all the people associated with said cases. This is a sight for discussing and yes "sleuthing" public records and legitimate news sources. It just goes to show, he's NOT VERY BRIGHT.

Hell if anyone had a case against the posters at WS it would be the Ramsey's, the Anthony's, and the McCann's etc. Raven should be thanking his lucky stars this story didn't go "hot" in the media. There would be 100's more people here sharing opinions and sleuthing out facts. Tricia runs a tight ship here and so she should. I just don't think Raven understands that everything you put up on the internet is there for ever and is easily available to anyone who knows how to find it. We have rules here about siting sources, there is no stating as FACT anything that can't be backed up with legitimate sources. When we are here discussing a case and posting our opinions and our thoughts they are just that... opinions and thoughts unless otherwise confirmed by open legitimate sources. Nothing said here is fact, until it's proven to be fact. We figured him out from the get-go and followed his butt all over the www and yeah, we got a little passionate about it all. We are not that different from a group of people sitting around a town square having different conversations about different topics at various picnic tables or sitting in a circle under a tree. God bless America.

ETA: There are even strict rules about sleuthing out extended people involved in a case. However, public records are just that, public. Having an opinion one way or another and sharing those opinions and discussing true crime cases is NOT illegal.

 

[L L & S]

Let me just add one more thing.... threatening to KILL someone else while on trial for murdering your wife is, imo, a legitimate threat and should be taken seriously. Raven scares me, and if he's found not guilty, I would absolutely be worried. Especially with the feeling of.... "I got away with it once....."

 

[Hadassah32]

I missed this morning as the live feed wouldn't work. (im in BC Canada) and I got it now but it says they are reviewing evidence. I thought they did this after in the deliberation room after closing arguments. Your system is different than ours here.

 

[seattlechiquita]

Let me just add one more thing.... threatening to KILL someone else while on trial for murdering your wife is, imo, a legitimate threat and should be taken seriously. Raven scares me, and if he's found not guilty, I would absolutely be worried. Especially with the feeling of.... "I got away with it once....."

I am all creeped out now. Either he is even more of a pyschopath, or he is even more of an idiot. :facepalm:

 

[guera]

In this article, it says the testimony heard earlier from Raven was from October 19, 2012:

http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/05/28/2922968/janet-abaroas-former-boyfriend.html

"Jurors also heard a transcript of an Oct. 19, 2012, hearing regarding a laptop that was missing from Abaroa’s home the night of the murder."

 

[guera]

I missed this morning as the live feed wouldn't work. (im in BC Canada) and I got it now but it says they are reviewing evidence. I thought they did this after in the deliberation room after closing arguments. Your system is different than ours here.

They're reviewing bank records and I believe a transcript from a hearing on Oct 19th, 2012 regarding the missing laptop. Raven doesn't come off terribly well, IMO. As the article states: "When a prosecutor asked Abaroa if he knew that he had backups of the contents of his stolen computer at the hearing, he is recorded as having said, 'I don’t. I don’t know if any of that is relevant to my wife’s murder and that is my opinion.'"