I'm hoping someone can help me with this. I truly, in my heart of hearts, cannot understand why half of a city has made a psychopath into some kind of posterboy-celebrity-martyr for such lofty causes as dad's rights and the soundness of the entire American justice and law enforcement system. It just boggles my mind. I have read and read to try and understand some of the viewpoints, and I might as well be reading Chinese. If you were going to pick a poster boy for such lofty concepts, wouldn't you pick someone who wasn't a BC? Who didn't evidence the traits of a psychopath? Who did evidence some concern for a missing wife and later two motherless children? Who didn't lie and change his story? Who didn't require the entire free world to be involved in conspiracy in order to make him somehow innocent?
I'm not baffled at those who want to see him have a fair trial. Everyone should have a fair trial. I'm baffled at those who have put him on a pedestal and made a psychopath a symbol for good.
One question: is there any way to know the Innocence Project's stance on this trial? Whether they will further involve themselves or walk away? Walking away from it would be a pretty strong indictment, wouldn't it?
Let see if I can help. First, I think many of you would surprised if you read the after verdict thread at GOLO. In the past they have had times when personal attacks flying in all directions, that on a site that screens comments before allowing their inclusion. Most people were shocked that the evidence could supported a finding of G BYaRD and were very angry with the judge not allowing GM to testify because the State would be adversely affected. This site has had its own moments when high emotions overwhelmed good judgment, disagreements devolved into personal attacks, then TOs. I would expect that a NG verdict would have been devastating for many of you who have been certain BDI from the beginning.
(BTW This is the first site for me where TOs are discussed and joked about, implying that they are fairly ordinary occurrences. I can understand the impact cases like these can have. Does this happen at other sites that discuss these cases?)
(I don't think it llkely that BC is a psychopath as generally defined, nor one of the diagnoses often associated with it, and psychopathy is not itself a diagnosis.)
From a day or two after NC went missing until the trial began, almost all one heard on the news and around town was about how BC abused NC until he finally killed her, about how he controlled her and kept her in constant fear, would not give her enough money to feed herself and the children. NC had found out about his affair, that was more than she could take, but she was trapped with no money, no passport, no way to leave before it was too late.
This was the first major televised trial since the SBI scandal, the wrongful convictions overturned , the Duke lacrosse case, and lot more. Unlike in the past, this time people were paying close attention to the process, the judge and his rulings, the police testimony, etc. When the trial began, the vast majority thought he was either guilty or probably guilty.
The testimony of DD, CD, and JA got everyone's attention. More hearsay, more gossip than anyone could remember before. The picture it painted of NC, her friends, her marriage, her abuse, ... was shockingly different than the one most people had a week earlier; and these were the prosecution witnesses! People really started to pay attention now.
Now came about two weeks of forensic and police testimony ending with JY. It seemed an unending series of "this looks like something important", "never mind", "no followup", or "accidents" that seemed to lead nowhere and only raised more questions about the CPD. Then came a group of friends, starting with HP. Much of the public, online and in person, was going "OMG! What is it with these people? Why are the prosecutors wasting everyone's time; don't they have any real evidence?"
Yes there is. See this mica and these bugs. Then KL, her other testimony overshadowed by the bombshell regarding the man with NC at the wedding. After AS the next day, four weeks into the trial, the testimony portrayed NC as emotionally abusive towards BC, no physical abuse by BC or NC, and the only controlling behavior seemed divorce related: using a second mortgage to pay off and close their credit card accounts; putting NC on an allowance, and effectively putting him on a much smaller one; the monitoring of emails, or at least archiving them as possible evidence in divorce or custody hearings; and the passport issues.
None of this made BC look like a hero, but it is very much for people with financial problems, marriage problems, and preparing for separation and divorce. During this period, BC appeared to act in ways consistent with someone who stupidly had an affair which, when finally being forced to admit to it, had destroyed his marriage. It was his fault. NC and the children would move to Canada, etc.
AS changed all that. Her extremely aggressive, confrontational style was the last thing B and N needed. While the initial draft agreement was so over the top that no one would ever sign it, once it is has poisoned the well it is hard to get back to a mode of being nice and playing fair. If NC had taken that $7,500 and used part of it for a mediator/facilitator-style attorney and the rest for moving & living expenses, the likely outcomes would have been better than the best from the course she took. There are no winners in a divorce particularly with children involved (except the attorneys).
Some Background (for those who might not already know):
AS is the former law partner of Gov. Perdue's ex-husband, now deceased. She served several terms as a district court judge, and is now with one of the top, most politically connected law firms in NC. Judge DS worked under her at the same firm before becoming a judge.
The majority of the attorneys involved this are UNC Law, most of the others from Campbell or NCCU.
I have no personal experience with AS, but by reputation she reminds me of other UNC Law grads of that period in family law who would be a strong advocate if what you needed was pit bull on angel dust.
Anyway, the father's rights groups in Wake County have had a lot of experience with AS and DS, and for many men over there the draft separation agreement was like waving a red flag in front of them.
Through the desposition and the testimony by Det D, as each part of the State's case was introduced, the defense on cross seemed to neutralize it. When Det D admitted there was evidence the call was spoofed, only the Google Maps search remained to anchor the prosecution's case.
Since the testimony about the Google maps was blacked out, there was a lot more people watching when JW was on the stand. Many were outraged that JW was blocked from discussing the contents of BC's disk because he was not a forensic expert. A bit like not allowing an expert in a medical specialty from discussing the autopsy results.
When the judge then denied a dding GM as a substitute forensic expert because his name was not on the witness list and the State would be adversely affected, it se emed unfair in the extreme especially after weeks of hearing gossip. The prosecutors appeared more interested in winning than in honoring their special obligations under NC law.
The cellphone expert had testified that the erasure was not an accident, or even two, which CPD covered up, lied about it under oath, and did not disclose it until it was too late to request the most-detailed logs from AT&T as a partial replacement. With the arrival of the ducks, the defense seemed to have reasonable doubt with everything except the search. The testimony as an Offer of Proof by GM (not heard by the jurors) was enough for reasonable doubt for much of the public.
That is my explanation for the responses you see at GOLO and elsewhere.
Some additional observations:
We need to find a better set of terms for discussing dv and abuse. When most people heard BC described as abusive and controlling, they thought of the stereotype with many episodes, needing medical treatment, maybe LE, and with many victims feeling shame and humiliation, usually hiding it from outsiders.
When NC's friends testified to the details of what had been thought abusive and controlling, because it was so different from what those terms usually describe, the witnesses lost a lot of their credibility. The danger posed by a spouse or SO with no prior incidents of physical violence is still quite real and about half the victims are completely unaware of any danger.
