TorisMom003
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2009
- Messages
- 4,386
- Reaction score
- 7
If the defense is hanging their hat on their (lack of a) defense then I have a feeling they will be sorely disappointed.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Very good post and I have thought about how many people just went along with Martin and apparently have his whole life. On that day he gets son and girlfriend to throw out pills (key evidence to see what happened)...bet they regret that even to the point of suicide....and the neighbors...certainly MM could have gotten her out. The guy on the stand now is absolute rubbish. Then there were two women who could have gotten her out...they did not and waited for a "man". I mean really!!
Corpses tend to float on water.
the nurse practitioner (i think that is who he was) that testified, reported mm called to tell him he was coding his wife. Was information released as to the time of this call compared to a call to 911? Thanks.
... As a whole this has got to be the most ridiculous defense I have ever seen. All witnesses are a joke.
That being said...I think Martin did intentionally kill his wife, but I am worried about the strength of prosecution. What about you guys? If you were on this jury with only information that was presented at trial, would you vote NG or G?
I can now see why they had trouble getting this to trial.
The defense didn't need to put on a case.
I don't think he will win on appeal if he is convicted. Just b/c your attorneys are no good, doesn't mean winning an appeal.
Another one for minor4th.... If the defense hadn't put up a defense - or to be more accurate if they hadn't called any witnesses (haha) - would they get to give their closing last? That would have been a better strategy IMHO than blowing it with four witnesses who were useless at best and detrimental to their case at worst.
Yes, they get to give their closing last, either way. They probably also didn't put on much of a case because they didn't want to open it up to rebuttal.
I didn't expect MM to testify but I always thought the judge had to query a defendant as to whether it was their decision and their decision alone not to testify and the defendant has to answer. Is this not the case here or did I miss it?
I don't think he will win on appeal if he is convicted. Just b/c your attorneys are no good, doesn't mean winning an appeal.