Zach Adams on trial for the kidnapping and murder of Holly Bobo Sept 18, 2017 graphic

[2Hope4]

The aunt that owns that farm/the barn/corn crib, is an Evans. The lawyer that Shayne had was an Evans... are they related?

 

[OtisC]

Yes indeed and they are guilty of what is known as "the CSI effect." They watch TV and think the real world works just that way and expect the state to prove the case in 42 min, with lots of DNA and fancy graphics, and if it's a crime that is devoid of forensic gotchas that means "there's no evidence."

It's gotten so pervasive DA's often resort to mentioning in their openings to a jury this is not the TV show "CSI" it's real life.

If juries aren't being screened for being able to discern real life from a fictional TV show, they should be.

I think very few people understand and appreciate to any great extent how the process works.

The influence of TV shows is even more prevalent, in my opinion, on how the general public goes about trying to solve a crime before an arrest is made. Past experiences, emotions, and bias tend to block out or replace evidence sometimes.

 

[Gee]

http://wsmv.images.worldnow.com/library/b12830a9-4f6d-4535-89bc-eeb37ae1c7ea.pdf

Sooo can anyone tell me if this judge is the same mentioned in this document? Because it's obvious to even us watchers that the judge is against the defense for whatever reason... if he had already been asked to step down and refused, and it's him I've watched for a week, then I'm disgusted...

It is the same judge. This was covered in one of the pretrial hearings - it was televised so you might be able to find the video.

ETA: I see no reason for the judge to step down

 

[2Hope4]

Yes indeed and they are guilty of what is known as "the CSI effect." They watch TV and think the real world works just that way and expect the state to prove the case in 42 min, with lots of DNA and fancy graphics, and if it's a crime that is devoid of forensic gotchas that means "there's no evidence."

It's gotten so pervasive DA's often resort to mentioning in their openings to a jury this is not the TV show "CSI" it's real life.

If juries aren't being screened for being able to discern real life from a fictional TV show, they should be.

Respectfully disagree. We have no way of knowing what juries are looking for if anything other than facts to prove the case.

I, as a member of society, and a potential juror for any trial, am looking for the facts to prove the guilt, and if those facts aren't there, then no case. Not asking for a video of the crime, "CSI effect", etc. MY observations, MY viewpoint as a juror is just as important as any other.

No matter how much I 'think' a person is guilty, 'think' I know it all, 'think' there's no other viewpoint, I will not vote guilty if the state doesn't provide the facts! I personally don't feel morally that I could just throw the rules of the court, the constitutional rights of the accused, and the checks and balances of a court out the window. I would hope that other jurors felt the same if I was being accused of a crime, and the state had nothing to prove it.

As an aside, since in forums it is often assumed that anyone going against the majority must have a 'dog in the race'... nope... I don't. I don't know anyone at all in this case. Don't even know the area this crime occurred other than it's in TN. I have never been in any legal trouble that I would need an attorney. Never been a defendant. Never hired a defense attorney. Etc, Etc. Etc. While I have seen some 48hrs or whatever shows on TV, I actually rarely watch TV, and trials that I do watch are live stream trials.

Been a member here since 2008, so have seen plenty of cases, plenty of trials.

 

[terpstra1]

http://wsmv.images.worldnow.com/library/b12830a9-4f6d-4535-89bc-eeb37ae1c7ea.pdf

Sooo can anyone tell me if this judge is the same mentioned in this document? Because it's obvious to even us watchers that the judge is against the defense for whatever reason... if he had already been asked to step down and refused, and it's him I've watched for a week, then I'm disgusted...

I honestly havent seen a problem with his conduct. I think he runs a strict court but nothing out of line that I've seen.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

I think very few people understand and appreciate to any great extent how the process works.

Very astute point! I've even seen people who have followed murder cases before who still don't understand the process. Or maybe it's willful ignorance. Either way, it's like they're in their own version of the movie, "Groundhog Day."

The influence of TV shows is even more prevalent, in my opinion, on how the general public goes about trying to solve a crime before an arrest is made. Past experiences, emotions, and bias tend to block out or replace evidence sometimes.

It's not like there isn't a lot of information, good information, available out there on the Internet. In some cases you can even read the testimony from trial transcripts, gavel to gavel. I think you're right that emotions and bias are used by a large swath of the general public and testimony and evidence gets pushed to the back, as if it's meaningless. Along with that are increasingly limited spans of attention and an inability to take in more than 1 piece of information at a time.

 

[Madeleine74]

Respectfully disagree. We have no way of knowing what juries are looking for if anything other than facts to prove the case.

You disagree that there is a thing called "the CSI effect?"

It's real and it's a thing trial attorneys have to deal with. I've watched trials where the jurors were specifically told they would not see the kinds of evidence shown in TV shows like "CSI."

https://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/trialevidence/articles/winterspring2012-0512-csi-effect-jurors.html

http://www.npr.org/2011/02/06/133497696/is-the-csi-effect-influencing-courtrooms

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Question. In TN does the Jury vote on the sentence of death or is it strictly the Judge's decision?

No single Judge can impose death. All death penalty cases/sentences must be decided by 12 jurors and they all have to be unanimous.

That ruling was made a few years ago by the USSC. That is why Arias was spared the death penalty. 11 voted for death and 1 voted for LWOP.

 

[Ellej]

I'm disappointed that the state did not bring any phone text convos, pics, etc into any of the evidence.

Am I wrong, or aren't texts available from cell phone companies, if warranted by TBI etc?

I thought this was an obvious area that would be exposed.

Maybe these culprits weren't in touch via cell during the crime because they were with one another, and I know, they were a bunch of meth heads, so it is doubtful they wrote novels to each other in text, I get it.

But I find it hard to believe over the course of time that they didn't once text about it, send a picture about it, or the "alleged" video we have all heard about. I am assuming this video never turned up with all the prior investigation, so I wasn't expecting it. But I did expect text streams from Zach Adams, Dylan Adams and Jason Autry.

Since it was shown Zach posted what he did on Facebook, I imagine he slipped a text or two about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Plumeria5]

[FONT=&]Burton Staggs‏ @burtstaggsnews [video=twitter;909885618532044802]https://twitter.com/burtstaggsnews/status/909885618532044802[/video]More


[/FONT]
[FONT=&]#HollyboboThe document that they have been discussind says that:"Zach called and said I have her changed up... http://fb.me/2nsbfnsOi

[/FONT]"You have to gut them so they don't float"
They put her in the river near a rock with an orange T

changed or chained? Cause if it is "changed", I don't know what that means.

 

[tentam4evr]

'I, as a member of society, and a potential juror for any trial, am looking for the facts to prove the guilt, and if those facts aren't there, then no case'

As a potential juror, I believe in Jury Nullification and so should you. As an example for voting your conscience..say you walk into a room in your house and see man raping a family member and you pick up a gun and shoot him and kill him. Now the Law says you're guilty of murder. But me, serving on a jury would vote NOT guilty regardless of what the law says. That's an example of jury nullification. You vote your conscience or you vote JUSTICE based on the facts you've been presented with taking into consideration the circumstances.

Now in this Bobo case, there is more than enough circumstantial evidence that Zach Adams is guilty of the crimes he has been accused of. Now I would LIKE to know, WHO exactly helped him dispose of her body. Who attacked Holly in her carport. Who led her into the woods.
Who was waiting on them. I would like to know the part Dylan played if any. I would like to know the part Shane played.

But we ain't gonna find any of that out unless Zach or Dylan confess. Speaking of Dylan, does anyone know when his trial will be?

 

[Ellej]

changed or chained? Cause if it is "changed", I don't know what that means.

I have see this as "chained" about 5 different places. But for the life of me I cannot find the original linked news story where I first saw this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tentam4evr]

changed or chained? Cause if it is "changed", I don't know what that means.

Isn't that hearsay without a copy of said document?

 

[Ellej]

Ok here is "chained" quote....in court back in February

http://m.wmcactionnews5.com/story/34399726/major-developments-expected-in-holly-bobo-case


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jggordo]

Isn't that hearsay without a copy of said document?

Which IMO is why the Judged ruled it as inadmissible as "hearsay" even with a copy of the document. Shane is not alive to authenticate it or be cross examined.

JMO

 

[Bently]

Question. In TN does the Jury vote on the sentence of death or is it strictly the Judge's decision?

I beleive the Supreme Court of the United States decided a few years ago that it was only a jury's decision.

 

[turaj]

Katy, to me, that would be a hard choice if the guilt was not proven in court. While it is tempting to "side-step" our court system to do what is "right" in our eyes, that is a very dangerous and slippery slope.

However, I do respect your emotions on the matter.

i get that it needs to be based on the evidence presented but in this case it is so clear this man needs to be away from society forever and I could vote guilty with no problem even if evidence fell short.

 

[Emi]

http://wsmv.images.worldnow.com/library/b12830a9-4f6d-4535-89bc-eeb37ae1c7ea.pdf

Sooo can anyone tell me if this judge is the same mentioned in this document? Because it's obvious to even us watchers that the judge is against the defense for whatever reason... if he had already been asked to step down and refused, and it's him I've watched for a week, then I'm disgusted...

yes it is the same exact judge

 

[lonetraveler]

I think the defense's closing statement will focus solely on 1) No physical evidence of rape 2) No physical evidence tying ZA to either kidnapping or murder 3) The only evidence is provided by those with significant criminal records and even some that have admitting lying in court before. The sentence by the defense should be "How can you, with good moral conscience, send someone to death with such a lack of evidence?".

Of course Defense will point out that evidence presented by Prosecution is circumstantial. But, I've seen many jurors go with a guilty verdict based upon circumstantial evidence.

 

[popsicle]

changed or chained? Cause if it is "changed", I don't know what that means.

chained --I think auto-correct effect is the culprit.