Zach Adams on trial for the kidnapping and murder of Holly Bobo Sept 20 & 21, 2017

[Gardenista]

It is incredibly dead and glazed over his eyes look. Just black holes like a shark. I found a picture of him from 2015 and he had dead eyes then too, but not like this. I wonder if they have him medicated and it's enlarged his pupils or something?

I heard a local reporter say yesterday that he knew several women who were potential jurors. I can't remember his exact words, but basically he said all of them were totally creeped out by the way ZA looked at them.

 

[Dogface]

Unless he has info that we haven't heard before, this isn't accurate. I've been following this case for years, and we had the statements offered by SA, and in them he never admitted (in fact, vehemently denied) any involvement except in the disposal of the body. In fact, his plea deal was based on his claim of no involvement. His atty after his death continued to say the same thing, on his behalf.

I found this article, which doesn't list ALL things SA was exempt from, but implies it is more than just the disposal.

Austin had denied any involvement in Bobo's disappearance and death and was never charged. A March 6 agreement between Austin and authorities granted him immunity from various charges in the case, including "all charges arising out of the disposal, destruction, burial, and/or concealment of Holly Bobo's deceased body," court documents show.

The agreement hinged on Bobo's body being recovered from the place where Austin said it was buried. It also included a provision granting Austin immunity for drug-related criminal activity "not to include any drugs administered to Holly Lynn Bobo."

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/special-reports/abduction-holly-bobo/2015/02/27/shayne-austin-found-hanged/24115817/

 

[Emi]

[video=twitter;910869607086526464]https://twitter.com/BrettMartinTV/status/910869607086526464[/video]

[video=twitter;910869356611031040]https://twitter.com/burtstaggsnews/status/910869356611031040[/video]

[video=twitter;910869348113424386]https://twitter.com/MarandaFaris/status/910869348113424386[/video]

 

[lonetraveler]

It was former TBI Agent Terry Dicus, who responded, when asked by defense if Zach and Clint cooked meth together, "that's ridiculous". Dicus seemed to indicate further that they did not find any evidence they knew each other.

I don't think Zach and Clint ever cooked meth together either.

 

[Emi]

[video=twitter;910870477526233090]https://twitter.com/_KCummings_/status/910870477526233090[/video]

[video=twitter;910870202367266816]https://twitter.com/burtstaggsnews/status/910870202367266816[/video]

[video=twitter;910870789569859584]https://twitter.com/_KCummings_/status/910870789569859584[/video]

 

[Emi]

[video=twitter;910871357814165505]https://twitter.com/_KCummings_/status/910871357814165505[/video]

[video=twitter;910871758709936128]https://twitter.com/_KCummings_/status/910871758709936128[/video]

[video=twitter;910872130593665024]https://twitter.com/_KCummings_/status/910872130593665024[/video]

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I don't think Zach and Clint ever cooked meth together either.

Clint testified that he did not know Zach Adams. Not one witness testified that he did know him other than JA repeating what ZA told him about him going to his home to teach him how to make meth. Imo, if ZA said this to JA it was a lie to cover up the real reason they were there and that was to kidnap Holly.

 

[lonetraveler]

Also, a witness said "zach was there for the worst part" which I think would, for him, be the dismemberment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. IMO ZA was referring to the "worst part" for him, personally. In no way do I believe that he was considering anything as being "worst" for Holly.

 

[Ellej]

Also, a witness said "zach was there for the worst part" which I think would, for him, be the dismemberment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I posted this too just a few min ago! [emoji4] Thinking alike!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SteveS]

I found this article, which doesn't list ALL things SA was exempt from, but implies it is more than just the disposal.
http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...15/02/27/shayne-austin-found-hanged/24115817/

Yep. At one time we actually saw the agreement posted online. In it, SA was getting immunity for anything after death (which I take as basically being about disposal), and as you note he was also getting forgiveness for other drug charges as well. I focused on disposal as the intent, because one of the conditions was that he tell where she was buried and it turns out to be true, but there certainly could have been other relatively-minor things after death as well.

So when someone says SA confessed to these crimes, that's pretty much claiming the opposite of the facts we know, of what he was admitting at the time. In the same document, he denied any involvement in the crimes that we're seeing mentioned in this trial, and the plea hinged on that lack of involvement.

 

[maskedwoman]

Yes! That is how I feel. If you weren't there for testimonial evidence then why are you here testifying about what was said? When she dinged him on the fact that he had said Britt was suspicious in the report and he had just denied that, he lost almost all credibility for me.

I know a lot of y'all know way more than me on this regard...how common is it for someone like Britt to change their MO? I suspect going from just rape, to raping and killing, isn't a huge leap simply because a rapist doesn't want to be caught. I need to go find the details of Britts previous cases(like were they ambush rapes of strangers?).

At this point I think it's s 50/50 chance on what the verdict could be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We have had serial rapists in Nashville more than once and none of them escalated to murder. On the other hand, we have had murder victims who were also raped. I checked the sex offender registry and Britt's record includes rape, attempted rape, and sexual assault. Articles I read indicate he did sometimes abduct his victims using a van. But his MO was apparently to drive around (sometimes with one other person) and grab a victim of opportunity. This crime was committed differently, MOO. :moo:

 

[Harmony 2]

Phone pings case map, hopefully I got them all in! Let me know if there are any problems accessing it.https://drive.google.com/open?id=1tH01zP2KNOnLQgYhARai36SQRlU&usp=sharing
ETA:Ack sorry for some of the alignment issues in the boxes. I thought I fixed them all.

Thank you so much for your time and effort in completing the map. I added the link to the opening post.

 

[Emi]

[video=twitter;910873215840514048]https://twitter.com/LeahBethFOX13/status/910873215840514048[/video]

[video=twitter;910873579633496064]https://twitter.com/_KCummings_/status/910873579633496064[/video]

[video=twitter;910873942331707392]https://twitter.com/LeahBethFOX13/status/910873942331707392[/video]

 

[Rayemonde]

Can some of the reasonable doubters explain this one to me?

Cell mate said Zach said “they got no body, they got no gun.” This was said prior to the skull being found. Then when the skull was found, it had a bullet hole in it. If Zach was lying, how did he know the weapon was a gun?

Another person testified he said “I can’t clear my name, I’m too involved”

Another person testified he said “I was there for the worst of it.”

I can completely understand how a person in jail will say untrue stuff, but here we have multiple witnesses saying Zach provided details. He wasn’t just saying “it’s me.” He had specific details that were not publicly available at that time. How did he have those details if he didn’t do it or wasn’t there?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good point about the body and gun comment... I would give some weight to that witnesses testimony *if* the prosecution had shown that he came forward with his story, and specifically mentioned a gun, *before* the body was found. If he already knew from prison gossip or whatever that HB was shot when he came forward to authorities then I give it much less weight. He could have lied intentionally, or he could have innocently misremembered what ZA said to him - ZA might have said "they ain't got no body, ain't got no weapon" and he misremembered it as gun, for example.

 

[SteveS]

Clint testified that he did not know Zach Adams. Not one witness testified that he did know him other than JA repeating what ZA told him about him going to his home to teach him how to make meth. Imo, if ZA said this to JA it was a lie to cover up the real reason they were there and that was to kidnap Holly.

Although I agree there's been no other testimony that would support it, I actually think the meth class claim does a better job of explaining Clint's actions and reactions and explanations that morning. Flowing from it, he wasn't alarmed, and he didn't shoot anyone, and he wouldn't tell who it was, but maybe those oddities happened because he knew that the perps were there by his invitation, and he therefore figured it would all be okay eventually.

But even if we had reason to believe that story, it wouldn't help ZA at all to prove it. "Yes I kidnapped HB but you got the reason all wrong as to why I was there" isn't an argument worth offering. From CB's testimony, can we even put ZA at the scene of the kidnapping? CB obviously saw someone else, so no upside for ZA to put himself there for a different reason, if he was.

 

[Emi]

[video=twitter;910876257025499136]https://twitter.com/burtstaggsnews/status/910876257025499136[/video]

[video=twitter;910876105111949312]https://twitter.com/burtstaggsnews/status/910876105111949312[/video]

[video=twitter;910875019575808008]https://twitter.com/_KCummings_/status/910875019575808008[/video]

 

[lonetraveler]

I must admit that I have concerns about this verdict. You never know what a jury will decide. All it takes is one juror. If it's one thing I've learned over the years it's that it is never a "slam dunk" for a verdict. Although I have decided that he is guilty based upon the evidence presented, some jurors may not consider the circumstantial evidence. Heck, some jurors don't even consider video evidence of crimes.

 

[Emi]

[video=twitter;910876820861591558]https://twitter.com/WSMVCarley/status/910876820861591558[/video]

[video=twitter;910876809461473280]https://twitter.com/WSMV/status/910876809461473280[/video]

[video=twitter;910876914046337025]https://twitter.com/NC5_ChrisConte/status/910876914046337025[/video]

 

[Madeleine74]

Originally Posted by Holly G. Lightly

IMO, when Jennifer Nichols gets panicky that she may lose her case, she gets very nasty, obnoxious, rude, disrespectful, and generally behaves in a despicable manner. I am referring to her cross of the US Marshall. IMO, she was beyond despicable, and that was uncalled for.

:floorlaugh:

You've obviously never seen Arizona's Juan Martinez in action. He's abrasive and aggressive even to his own witnesses. Jennifer Nichols is a lamb in comparison. Besides, when women are tough they are called names and when men are tough it's he's just a manly man <shrug>. Misogyny 101.

 

[Emi]

[video=twitter;910877186386808832]https://twitter.com/MarandaFaris/status/910877186386808832[/video]

[video=twitter;910877275456974849]https://twitter.com/FOX13Memphis/status/910877275456974849[/video]

[video=twitter;910877228342398978]https://twitter.com/bchapman_WREG3/status/910877228342398978[/video]