TX - Moriah Wilson, 25, Cyclist Fatally Shot Before Race, Austin, 2022 *arrest* #7

[Seattle1]

Good questions. I wonder if the verdict is guilty, will the sentencing portion start right away or if there will be a hearing set for later.

In Texas, whether it by a guilty plea agreement or conviction by a jury, I've never seen the Court impose the sentence immediately.

Texas seems to follow the feds here where the Judge generally requests a pre-sentence investigation report, and sets sentencing for a later date.

Also, while the Judge is the default choice to determine punishment, in Texas, the defendant also has the right to have punishment determined by the jury.

The last Tx trial I watched where the defendant (David Temple) requested the jury decide his punishment, the jury could not agree on the punishment, and a mistrial declared for the sentencing phase!

It took two and a half more years following conviction to sentence the defendant (April 21, 2023). Fortunately, he was denied bond release while waiting his sentence.

David Mark Temple, 54, was convicted in August 2019 for a second time for killing his wife, Belinda. But that jury could not decide on a sentence, prompting a judge to declare a mistrial. Prosecutors sought a life prison term, and on Friday, they got that.

Texas: Sentencing

 

[ch_13]

A country without an extradition treaty would have obv been smarter, but perhaps implies that it’d be less hospitable for her as a single, petite western woman.

Rsbm.

As an aside, I just want to mention that I think most people have the wrong idea about non-extradition countries. There seems to be some assumption that they are a safe haven, if you can reach one you can never be sent back to the U.S.

That's not really true, though. All it means that there is no set procedure to return the accused and it needs to be negotiated between the governments. In general, countries do not want criminals inside their borders. It can become more complicated if the accused has ties to the country or if they have lots of money and can bribe the right people. But for an alleged murderer with no ties and no significant wealth who's just there as a tourist, the country doesn't even need to hold an extradition hearing. They can just cancel the visa and kick them out.

 

[BUF]

I saw a segment on CourtTV that said KA requested the jury to have the punishment decided by the jury if found guilty.

 

[Seattle1]

I saw a segment on CourtTV that said KA requested the jury to have the punishment decided by the jury if found guilty.

Thanks -- this could explain the 10/30/23 filing of petition for community supervision in advance of the trial starting.

ETA: add link

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 42A. COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

statutes.capitol.texas.gov

 

[Walela]

I saw a segment on CourtTV that said KA requested the jury to have the punishment decided by the jury if found guilty.

I guess she's hoping for a lighter sentence if she's convicted. Since Judges know how parole works in Texas, they can impose longer sentences to insure the guilty one serves an appropriate amount of time. Jurors don't know that parole can knock years off a sentence. That may be why she wants the jury to sentence her. moo

 

[BUF]

Thanks -- this could explain the 10/30/23 filing of petition for community supervision in advance of the trial starting.

ETA: add link

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 42A. COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

statutes.capitol.texas.gov

Yeah, I had read that link earlier and thought the same thing!

 

[Sundog]

I guess she's hoping for a lighter sentence if she's convicted. Since Judges know how parole works in Texas, they can impose longer sentences to insure the guilty one serves an appropriate amount of time. Jurors don't know that parole can knock years off a sentence. That may be why she wants the jury to sentence her. moo

Agree. And the presiding judge is not permitted to let the jury know about the possibility of parole in relation to time sentenced. So the only information they will be given on which to base their decision is the actual time of the sentence they are considering.

 

[JerseyWasHome2]

Agree. And the presiding judge is not permitted to let the jury know about the possibility of parole in relation to time sentenced. So the only information they will be given on which to base their decision is the actual time of the sentence they are considering.

Curious how a jury could ever come to agreement on a sentencing term, compared to one person (judge).

 

[Sundog]

I agree with the success of the sudden passion but won't be surprised if her attorneys argue for it.

If KA is found guilty, then for sure her defense will address the "passion defense" during the sentencing phase as one of the mitigating circumstances.
Texas law allows for the cirumstances of the offense to be presented as mitigating evidence, as well as other mitigating evidence, of course. They may also bring in an expert witness to testify.

In addition, there are no instructions or guidelines for the jury in relation to their weighing of mitigating evidence. In Texas, it is a subjective determination by each individual juror.

 

[Sundog]

Curious how a jury could ever come to agreement on a sentencing term, compared to one person (judge).

IANAL, but with the sentencing guidelines given by the judge, the jury will have to weigh the options based on the mitigating circumstances presented by the defense at the sentencing hearing, and the aggravating circumstances presented by the state. But they will know their options with regard to the sentencing guidelines that the judge gives them to consider.

 

[Howl]

I'm not sure how the jury could listen to the audio -- MW's screams, two gunshots, seconds of silence, another shot -- and not go for LWOP, especially when it's known that MW was on the floor when the final shot was fired into her chest. And THEN knowing that MW lay on the floor, clinging to life, until CC came home and found her.
I'm thinking about how incredibly loud those panicked screams were to be picked up on the audio of the neighbor's surveillance system.

Has there been testimony about how close the alleged shooter (KA) was to MW when the first two shots were fired?

 

[Tippy Lynn]

I'm not sure how the jury could listen to the audio -- MW's screams, two gunshots, seconds of silence, another shot -- and not go for LWOP, especially when it's known that MW was on the floor when the final shot was fired into her chest. And THEN knowing that MW lay on the floor, clinging to life, until CC came home and found her.
I'm thinking about how incredibly loud those panicked screams were to be picked up on the audio of the neighbor's surveillance system.

Has there been testimony about how close the alleged shooter (KA) was to MW when the first two shots were fired?

And the neighbors camera that captured it wasn’t right next door either. It was across the street and a few houses away

 

[JerseyWasHome2]

I'm not sure how the jury could listen to the audio -- MW's screams, two gunshots, seconds of silence, another shot -- and not go for LWOP, especially when it's known that MW was on the floor when the final shot was fired into her chest. And THEN knowing that MW lay on the floor, clinging to life, until CC came home and found her.
I'm thinking about how incredibly loud those panicked screams were to be picked up on the audio of the neighbor's surveillance system.

Has there been testimony about how close the alleged shooter (KA) was to MW when the first two shots were fired?

I don’t think any ballistics type of testimony from experts has occurred yet.

 

[Howl]

I don’t think any ballistics type of testimony from experts has occurred yet.

Thanks. I'll be following carefully over the first part of this coming week.

 

[ch_13]

I guess she's hoping for a lighter sentence if she's convicted. Since Judges know how parole works in Texas, they can impose longer sentences to insure the guilty one serves an appropriate amount of time. Jurors don't know that parole can knock years off a sentence. That may be why she wants the jury to sentence her. moo

I wonder who is likely to impose a more severe sentence following a murder trial, judges or juries. As you say, judges are more familiar with the parole system. On the other hand, perhaps juries are more shocked by heinous crimes, and/or they are more likely to sympathize with the victim, especially after listening to the victim impact statements that come in the penalty phase.

I did a quick google search and found one study that said that juries were less likely to impose the death penalty, while another study that said jury sentences were harsher for most crimes. But I couldn't find any studies about just non-capital murder sentences.

 

[BeachSky]

I guess she's hoping for a lighter sentence if she's convicted. Since Judges know how parole works in Texas, they can impose longer sentences to insure the guilty one serves an appropriate amount of time. Jurors don't know that parole can knock years off a sentence. That may be why she wants the jury to sentence her. moo

I hope jury puts an end to the princess thinking she’s special. JMO

 

[Mert]

This sounds like victim blaming to me, and it’s irrelevant anyway. There’s zero evidence MW was “going after” KA’s love interest.

I thought the original post may have been geared toward KS, not the victim. At least that is how I took it. I may be wrong.
*My opinion.

 

[Tabulator]

With so much discussion about a "sudden passion" defense, I have been considering KA's actions on that fateful evening...

Boyfriend CS leaves the house on his motorcycle and we now know KA is aware he is meeting up with MW. KA then gets her firearm and she either loads the gun before she leaves or brings ammunition with her - the bullets are designed to break apart on impact - they create maximum damage. KA brings the gun with her and she sets out for the pool - her fury and jealousy must be overflowing.

KA gets to the Eddy and she sees CS and MW swimming - she then spies them after the swim; probably smiling and talking. They are drinking beer and eating burgers - perhaps they are chatting about bike trails or new sponsorship opportunities - maybe even a little gossip. KA must have seen them; her rage all consuming! KA had called MW and warned her to stay away from HER boyfriend... But here she is. MW didn't listen - KA will make her pay.

MW is on the back of CS's motorcycle; probably with her arms wrapped around him - KA sees them and her jealousy takes over... CS drops MW off at her friend's house - KA watches it all with anticipation. Finally, MW is alone. KA's whole body must have been shaking with fury - she is going to kill MW. She parks her (very conspicuous and recognizable) vehicle around the corner and takes out her loaded gun. She gets out of the car...

So, this is where I just don't get it... Here is a (by many accounts) an attractive, smart, professional woman with family and friends who care about her; she is living a pretty amazing life.
Why didn't she just call one of these people before she got out of the car? I mean, seriously! Murdering MW is not the answer - no matter how angry she is. What is she thinking? Does she even consider what will happen?
She destroyed her own life because her anger and jealousy took over. She murdered an incredible person who deserved to live a long life and have her dreams become reality. MW's family will never be whole again - their grief and sorrow will never heal. CS? His racing career is over. He lost all his sponsors and his financial security is gone. Oh, and his guilt must be horrible.
All this carnage because of KA's rage and jealousy I am sorry, but this murder is absolutely premeditated and planned... She had so many opportunities to just not do it... Don't bring the gun, don't follow them, don't spy on them, call a friend, leave CS and his house. The list goes on and on. I will NEVER understand people who do these crimes!
KA had to maintain her rage and anger - she had it for months! Her jealousy fueled this murder ; What a horrible waste. So many lives destroyed. You would think she might have considered what would happen if she was caught!

KA deserves the maximum punishment.



Oh... All my opinion, of course.

 

[arielilane]

AUSTIN, Texas (Court TV) — Two of Kaitlin Armstrong‘s former friends testified that she confided to them that she was “angry” about her boyfriend Colin Strickland dating Anna Moriah “Mo” Wilson and said she wanted to kill Wilson.

Sketch shows Kaitlin Armstrong entering court during her murder trial. Courtroom sketch from TX v. Kaitlin Armstrong. (Sketch by Jorge Molina)
Armstrong is currently standing trial on charges she shot and killed Wilson on May 11, 2022.

Nicole Mertz, who considered Armstrong a best friend before the murder, said while with Armstrong at the Meteor restaurant in November 2021, Wilson walked in, and it invoked a strong reaction from Armstrong. “She was visibly angry, and I never seen her like that,” Mertz said.


Friends: Kaitlin Armstrong said she wanted to kill Mo Wilson

Posted at 3:41 PM, November 10, 2023

 

[jepop]

I agree with the success of the sudden passion but won't be surprised if her attorneys argue for it.

This just occurred to me and would love to hear from anyone who has watched or studied trials where convicted defendants have argued Crime of Passion as a mitigating factor at sentencing. Especially cases where the defendant either remains silent during trial after pleading NG to murder or takes the stand to deny the charges, rather than cases where, for eg, defense is pushing for manslaughter not murder or invoking insanity - ie where it is not at issue from the get go that defendant was involved in the death.

I know we haven't seen the guts of KA's defense yet, only opening statement and insinuations/innuendo (possibly re SODDI?) during cross. But if the thrust of her defense ends up being the evidence is faulty, LE got it wrong etc etc,which I think it will be because SODDI (an actual named one) does not appear feasible to me, how exactly does her D argue Crime of Passion at sentencing if she is convicted (which I believe at present she will be)? Would that have to involve KA testifying post conviction at sentencing that yes, I did it but it was Crime of Passion? In other words an admission? Or is it argued on her behalf by the D with KA maintaining her right to remain silent? And if KA herself testifies in trial and denies the allegations, how does Crime of Passion as mitigating factor play out in sentencing hearing? Would she remain silent whilst lawyers argue it or would she testify herself?