NH NH - Elizabeth Marriott, 19, Durham, 9 Oct 2012 - # 9 *S. Mazzaglia guilty*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
The concept of a trial within a trial is so meta it's making my head hurt.
 
Oh man, why didn't anyone wake me up. I dozed off after hearing the friend talking about playing on the computer while K&S were having sex behind him -- and he thought it was no big deal.

HELLO! Maybe I'm old fashioned at 50, but it bothers me to watch teens suckie face in public (while I mutter under my breath "get a room").

I just can't imagine how he thought this was normal, or okay. Were S&K pulling out the ropes and harness too?

What kind of person hangs around for that? I can only think of one "a perv". But that's just this old gals opinion.

MOO

Mel
 
OT What's wrong with people? Grandma made up story about KFC asking her and her dog bitten faced granddaughter to leave because the toddler was disturbing other diners.

Oh yeah they already are $135,000 richer and have had numerous offers to cover the young girl's medical bills to repair damage.

I think Grandma should be hauled in to face justice. She ruins it for others. I know I don't donate to anything except the charities I know because of people like that grandma. I can't be sure the $ will go to the child.
 
Guys I've removed some over the top posts poking fun at the witness. You all know better than that so think before you post please.
 
I think that is what I heard the Judge talking about.

So we are back live at 1:00 pm est?

What was Hinckley (sp?) planning on doing? Calling Barth as a witness? Why?

I think Davis would have had to call Barth to the stand (in surrebuttal) to defend against the prosecution's allegation/charts in rebuttal about what Barth said concerning who visited Seth and when during the investigator's testimony.

Prosecution's point was Barth said "I" about the visits and Hinckley wanted to prove by jail records that Barth hadn't been there, only Davis and maybe the investigator had seen Seth. At least that's what I took from it all, and judge was right (imo) in saying it would have become a trial within a trial with Barth having to defend himself over prosecution's rebuttal. That's all the prosecution was going to rebut so, no rebuttal at all.
 
I think Davis would have had to call Barth to the stand (in surrebuttal) to defend against the prosecution's allegation/charts in rebuttal about what Barth said concerning who visited Seth and when during the investigator's testimony.

Prosecution's point was Barth said "I" about the visits and Hinckley wanted to prove by jail records that Barth hadn't been there, only Davis and maybe the investigator had seen Seth. At least that's what I took from it all, and judge was right (imo) in saying it would have become a trial within a trial with Barth having to defend himself over prosecution's rebuttal. That's all the prosecution was going to rebut so, no rebuttal at all.

Its already been a trial within a trial IMO.....don't think we need more confusion.
 
Are they late for the charging conference or are we not getting it on stream?
 
I think Davis would have had to call Barth to the stand (in surrebuttal) to defend against the prosecution's allegation/charts in rebuttal about what Barth said concerning who visited Seth and when during the investigator's testimony.

Prosecution's point was Barth said "I" about the visits and Hinckley wanted to prove by jail records that Barth hadn't been there, only Davis and maybe the investigator had seen Seth. At least that's what I took from it all, and judge was right (imo) in saying it would have become a trial within a trial with Barth having to defend himself over prosecution's rebuttal. That's all the prosecution was going to rebut so, no rebuttal at all.

I can understand why the State would want to show the jury that all the times that Barth said 'I' as if he first hand had heard the testimony wasn't true and instead was hear say. I assume the other two people mentioned as visitors are from the defense's office. IMO Barth played loose with the truth on that. The two staff members should have been called.

Of course then the State would have had a go at them too.

Thanks for explaining it geevee!!!
 
Its already been a trial within a trial IMO.....don't think we need more confusion.

it really has...more of a trial about Kat and no doubt she will be the focus of defense closing. Barth has no case...somehow he forgot it was Seth that he needed to defend and in all honestly he is indefensible. I don't think it will be a very long jury deliberation at all...defense had no case and would have created more "reasonable doubt" by just resting last week.
 
I can understand why the State would want to show the jury that all the times that Barth said 'I' as if he first hand had heard the testimony wasn't true and instead was hear say. I assume the other two people mentioned as visitors are from the defense's office. IMO Barth played loose with the truth on that. The two staff members should have been called.

Of course then the State would have had a go at them too.

Thanks for explaining it geevee!!!

Yeah, this trial has been messy enough, no need to junk it up further and make the jury wade through testimony that has nothing to do with Seth's guilt or not. We already had Kat on a hot tin roof, don't really need The Barth testifying.

Back live.
 
So everyone has rested and closed now and we are hearing the charge conference?
 
and with that court is back in session tomorrow at 10:00 am EST......:seeya:
 
I missed the whole thing. Anything interesting happen?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
124
Guests online
2,965
Total visitors
3,089

Forum statistics

Threads
602,695
Messages
18,145,447
Members
231,496
Latest member
endoplazmikretikulum95
Back
Top