It does bother me that BOTH shoe experts can't say who was wearing the shoes but that is one of those questions the jury will discuss. The jury could come to the conclusion through Angela's interviews, Angela's testimony and shoe print experts, that it is beyond a reasonable doubt George wore the size shoe Angie says she bought for him. The shoe print found in blood at Chris Sr's and there was a shoe print found at Dana's.
BBM
I think the biggest problem I have is I went into this 100% believing George is guilty. I still do. We have lived and breathed this case for over 6 years and I think that is what we all think on here. If I had been called as a juror and asked can you be unbiased I would have said "Heck no, let's buy a new rope and take that booger out back and find a tall tree so we can string him up Clint Eastwood style. I don't think he deserves a trial." But that is not how the law works in the 21st century.
As far as the shoeprint evidence, I think this is where we are at.
You have two shoe experts who say they cannot place those shoes on George's feet.
You have one Walmart receipt for shoes and Angie on camera buying them. But they are a cheap shoe many people in the area has probably bought.
You have George when questioned in a room alone at the border of Canada saying he never saw the shoes.
You have Jake in a different room saying the same thing George did at the border.
Angie in a different room at the border says she bought the shoes, showed them to the boys, they didn't like them, so she threw them away.
This was all put on record when BCI questioned them at the border.
Then per AC Angie now comes back and says George wore those shoes to the crime scenes. Two stories. Which one is true?
Then per AC Jake says they left the house, went out in the barn and changed clothes and shoes. He then said they burned the clothes and shoes and put on clean ones before they returned home.
Nash is going to nail Angie on those two stories she put on record. Then he is going to nail her on George wearing them to the crime scene. Per AC Angie never left the house. Jake said she stayed home also. So how can she truthfully testify that George wore them if she didn't see them on his feet?
So there fore you have 2 shoe print experts who can't swear George ever wore the shoes, and George and Jake saying they never saw the shoes on one side and Angie with her ever changing stories on the other without any knowledge whether George ever put those shoes on since he left and came back in different shoes.
Now here is where I think AC is tanking her own case. She is relying heavily on Jake's proffer to get a conviction on George. The problem is she keeps calling all these emotionally distraught family members up there to testify that:
1. Jake groomed a 13 year old child and was abusing her (per Kendra) and having sex with her.
2. Jake got her pregnant at 15 and was abusing her, hitting, pushing and choking her (per April and Kendra)
3. Jake was locking her in a bedroom for many days and keeping her from seeing her parents. (per Corey)
4. Jake threatened to chop her legs off if she tried to leave. (per Chelsa.)
5. Jake murdered her and her entire family while most were asleep. (per jake)
Remember Jake is not on trial, and the problem with AC slinging this much mud at Jake, what do you think that jury's thoughts and feelings are about Jake right now. After hearing all that I am betting they are hostile to him at best, hating him at worst.
But AC needs the jury to bel