Verdict Watch

[Madeleine74]

I agree RC.

Spivey was so low key on the stand that one did not get the impression he did that much on the case. He was on for LESS than half a day. Contrast that with Det. McDreamy on the stand for 3 or 4 days in that last trial, and the lead det, Daniels, on the stand for about 1.5 days.

This team rushed witnesses through just so they wouldn't go as long as that other trial. But there's a happy medium. This is a long case and it's complicated and there are a lot of details. You can't just gloss over or skip details and expect the jury to know all that was done. Yes, you have to keep things moving but you must get the meat of it out and emphasized for the jury.

This presentation (that people noted was so calm) was also lackluster and ho-hum. It petered out in the end.

 

[gracielee]

I agree RC.

Spivey was so low key on the stand that one did not get the impression he did that much on the case. He was on for LESS than half a day. Contrast that with Det. McDreamy on the stand for 3 or 4 days in that last trial, and the lead det, Daniels, on the stand for about 1.5 days.

This team rushed witnesses through just so they wouldn't go as long as that other trial. But there's a happy medium. This is a long case and it's complicated and there are a lot of details. You can't just gloss over or skip details and expect the jury to know all that was done. Yes, you have to keep things moving but you must get the meat of it out and emphasized for the jury.

This presentation (that people noted was so calm) was also lackluster and ho-hum. It petered out in the end.

Yup, this is what happens when the prosecution *doesn't* introduce and address each and every possible issue. Judge Stephens may have streamlined this case right into either a terribly wrong and unfair verdict, or a mistrial.

 

[borndem]

It did seem the prosecutors were a little surprised tho.

If so, that is sub-standard performance for experienced attys, IMHO. If that had been me, at my job, that would have been a bad negative on my performance review.

 

[raisincharlie]

I don't blame any of the lawyers for rushing witnesses through - that issue falls squarely on Judge Stephens, he was the time keeper during this trial and he let it be known - he had the schedule. Jmo.

 

[gracielee]

If so, that is sub-standard performance for experienced attys, IMHO. If that had been me, at my job, that would have been a bad negative on my performance review.

The best we can now hope for is a hung jury and a mistrial. :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[StJohn]

In BH's defense, we all have times when our game is off, after all none of us are perfect. Reflecting on the cross of JY, she seemed to almost lack conviction, I found myself wondering if maybe she was doubting his guilt at that moment. Maybe he reminded her of a nephew or a friend's son and maybe she wasn't prepared for the emotion he displayed and it threw her off. Either way, I am sure JY's attorneys couldn't have been more delighted.

 

[Madeleine74]

Becky Holt loves reciting this number. This is also the same amount of time she and the DA's office had to imagine JLY taking the stand and having the opportunity to go for his jugular.

ONE THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED, AND NINETY THREE DAYS

and they only questioned him for 55 min and most of it was about his affairs.

So people love this judge.

This judge was adamant this case move FAST FAST FAST FAST. Did it need to be THAT fast? Could 1 more week have made a difference? Or was the state's team just not clear on the most important evidence to bring forth and hammer on?

 

[raisincharlie]

Yup, this is what happens when the prosecution *doesn't* introduce and address each and every possible issue. Judge Stephens may have streamlined this case right into either a terribly wrong and unfair verdict, or a mistrial.

You hit that nail square on the head Gracielee - I agree 100%. Way too much streamlining from the beginning. :banghead:

 

[Luna24]

I agree with Madeleine and NC East on Spivey being a bit sleepy and I thought there would be more there in his testimony.

JTF - I just want to thank you for all your posts since 2006 about this case at various sites (under a few names. )- much of the evidence/photos that was introduced or in SW through the years was no surprise to me because of your passion and information about the case. I remember reading your post after you had viewed some of the autopsy photos ( I believe it was them) and how deeply it affected you.

I hope you will if given the chance pass along how many of us are feeling about this possible hung jury to MF and LF - and how we still will pray for justice for them.

Thanks again - you've been a great champion for Michelle, the Fishers, C and R.

 

[happy2binNC]

What should we expect in terms of timing for a retrial? I hope LF and MF wouldn't have to wait another 5 years for justice to prevail.

 

[Madeleine74]

I would expect it would be within a few months, perhaps a bit less.

 

[Just the Fax]

Yea, Spivey was way too soft spoken.
He needed to show the jury he firmly was convinced JLY is a killer....he did not.

 

[borndem]

I don't know - I thought it was a NC rule? They had to view the stuff they asked to see on Friday in the court room without discussing it amongst each other..and then go back to the jury room to discuss it? doesn't that sound odd?

I agree, Luna -- that's why both sides put all the evidence (separately, of course) out in the court room for the jurors to view for as long as they wanted near the end of their cases. IIRC, they also did this during Cooper.

 

[fran]

I can't believe how the jury couldn't take away that JY NEVER talked to anyone about that night until the day he was on the stand. That he constantly wrote notes while he was sitting through the trial and how everyone else was wrong, in his eyes, except JY himself.

He lied to his wife when he said he loved her. Someone in love doesn't have two affairs and attempt another while their wife is pregnant.

One who's in love doesn't have intimate relations with another woman on the same couch they sit with their wife and child, in their own home.

One who's in love doesn't try to rekindle an old flame, especially while their wife is pregnant.

One who loves their wife doesn't remain silent about asking LE how the investigation is going about his murdered wife! 1693 days and he NEVER once inquired about his murdered wife's case.

The pros knew, KNOWS, the first thing a def attorney does is to, after disputing the law, disputes the evidence. They should have been ready with a witness from the hotel about the door lock on JY's room. Had anyone ever reported it not locking? Most likely not and could have dispelled JY's testimony after that.

The pros SHOULD have found, or zeroed in and POUNDED the def on the stand, that he was lying about. They could have blown his credibility with the jury by concentrating on just one thing until he either blew his anger or was rendered inaffective. IF a jury sees one thing a witness is lying about, then they can take everything he's testified to as a LIE and only given for self-serving purposes.

It was evident that this def only testified to get himself off. He wouldn't even testify to save his custody of his daughter. He wouldn't even ask LE how the investigation was going because it wouldn't benefit himself. I'm really surprised the jury can't see this.

The jury needs a strong foreman. Maybe they should switch and have someone else stronger lead them in their deliberations.

JMHO
fran

 

[Just the Fax]

I would expect it would be within a few months, perhaps a bit less.

I can't see how they could get that block of time scheduled so fast?

 

[Madeleine74]

Oh right court scheduling. Hmmm...never mind.

 

[gracielee]

Becky Holt loves reciting this number. This is also the same amount of time she and the DA's office had to imagine JLY taking the stand and having the opportunity to go for his jugular.

ONE THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED, AND NINETY THREE DAYS

and they only questioned him for 55 min and most of it was about his affairs.

So people love this judge.

This judge was adamant this case move FAST FAST FAST FAST. Did it need to be THAT fast? Could 1 more week have made a difference? Or was the state's team just not clear on the most important evidence to bring forth and hammer on?

I'm guessing Gessner isn't looking quite as bad right about now. You can't *RUSH* justice. Neither the prosecution nor the defense. Within reason, trials aren't like sports events, with certain time limits IMHO. Each side takes as long as it needs to present ALL the evidence. MOO MOO MOO

 

[happy2binNC]

The only thing I can hope for is that he gets tangled in his lies on retrial and sinks his own ship. The truth is easily recalled, but lies have to be covered with more and more untruths until it's difficult to remember what you've said previously.

Sigh. I'm so angry right now I can't concentrate on anything.

 

[DogWood]

I just hope CW decides to retry the case...

 

[Just the Fax]

I can see a change of venue with a new trial.