NC vs. Raven Abaroa ~ the Trial 3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Scott Hall was an ex-boyfriend (back in the 90's) before she met Raven and considering she married Raven in 2000 and was murdered in 2005, that's not a big deal. As a matter of fact I believe Scott Hall was at her Janet's One Year Anniversary Vigil in Durham, when the defendant couldn't even bother to make it there.

~~ snipped by me
He was there, I have photos of him, plus we had a bite to eat after the vigil, along with a couple other friends of Janet and her family.
 
Holy Crap.....I cannot believe what a cluster**** Durham is.

Well, believe it, trix -- it's as screwy as the traffic and the politics there. And who knoze what happened in the City Justice area before & during the start of this case...

Durham is a somewhat unique, IMO, city of approx. 273,000 folks.
 
Item 453is pocket PC and charger.
454 Western digital hard drive.
Image files - hard drive image. Image of MM computer. Contains examiner's base line image of WOS.
2nd hanging folder - papers. This is states 455. Durham LE search consent form. Date - May 3, 2005. Return May 5, 2005 - dates LE had the hard drive, I think.

Defense cross now
 
It almost seems as if Janet was purposely leaving clues for someone to find. :-(
 
Defense insinuating state lead him.
Use search terms? Yes. Did not complete this anlysis.
Searched for "Raven", and other names for word search.
Asking AGAIN when he heard about it . THURSDAY - same answer every time.
Search for internet history? Yes Spoke to state about results, but no report.
Were you aware it was Janet's hard drive from 2005? Yes.
defense DONE.
 
I missed the prosecution's examination of this witness. Did I miss anything important? What did they ask him?
 
Post 385 - however they didn't tell us the results - AGAIN.

Lost quote - this is in response to state questioning of this wit.
 
Hoping another wit will tell us the results of the computer and PC examination.
The state did not REST, did it???????????
 
Hoping another wit will tell us the results of the computer and PC examination.
The state did not REST, did it???????????

It looks like it. I'm so confused, what was damaging about the new evidence?
 
Had a busy week last week, what the heck is going on here?

Typical (I hope) def team tactics for sanction against PT (denied at this time), mistrial - denied, etc., etc. More throwing it against the wall & seeing what sticks -- nuttin' so far, honey.

Hi, Glee :seeya:!!
 
I have no clue what's going on. 'Jurors reviewing evidence' is on the wral feed screen.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
82
Guests online
2,274
Total visitors
2,356

Forum statistics

Threads
602,015
Messages
18,133,296
Members
231,207
Latest member
ragnimom
Back
Top