Zach Adams on trial -kidnapping/murder Holly Bobo 9/20-22, 2017 GUILTY

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Given this is a DP case I would think jurors would want to go thru the evidence presented piece by piece. I know I would even if I concluded early in for a guilty verdict. Once u sign your name you are signing a death sentence. That's huge and would never want to second guess myself down the road.
 
It took 7 days for a jury to come to a guilty verdict in Scott Peterson trial. It took 9 days to acquit Robert Blake in his wife's death.

IMO, hopefully they deliberate more than 12 hours for sure.

Sent from my VK815 using Tapatalk

I even think they could continue deliberating tomorrow or much longer as you suggest. All juries are different. What is promising is they seem to all be working diligently together and haven't even asked any questions or for read backs. I believe most or all took good notes and were paying attention throughout.

It took the jury 13 days to come back with a guilty verdict on David Westerfield and he was sentenced to death for the kidnapping, rape, and murder of little Danielle Van Dam.
 
Given this is a DP case I would think jurors would want to go thru the evidence presented piece by piece. I know I would even if I concluded early in for a guilty verdict. Once u sign your name you are signing a death sentence. That's huge and would never want to second guess myself down the road.

They aren’t voting on the DP right now. Right now they are voting guilty/not guilty. If they vote guilty of murder 1, another phase begins. The pros argue the aggravating factor. The defense argues mitigating factors. The the jury votes for the DP.

If they convict of a lesser included charge, the DP is off the table. Punishment is then assigned later by the judge.

They even have a specific instruction right now to not consider punishment. It’s just guilty/not guilty at this point starting with the most serious charges first.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
[video=twitter;911277887315234816]https://twitter.com/_KCummings_/status/911277887315234816[/video]

[video=twitter;911278816873631744]https://twitter.com/LeahBethFOX13/status/911278816873631744[/video]
 
I am not sure we will ever know what or who all was in the video but I do believe it was taken of her being raped. Dylan said there was a video long ago and so did Sandra King before the current witness testified being told by ZA of the video.

Perhaps it will be found one day later on like how the Mel Ignato video was found years later after his murder trial had been held for the murder of his girlfriend. It showed him restraining her, torturing her, brutally raping her and killing her but all of that came way too late for the victim's family who knew all along he had murdered her. He was found NG so he could never be retried for her murder. He simply got away with murder.

I also know there was a video taken by Joseph Duncan showing him repeatedly torturing, repeatedly raping, and killing 11 year old Dylan and Shasta who lived. The video was never shown to the jury. It would have been had Shasta had to testify so he agreed she would not be cross examined by him saving her from having to take the stand. He was convicted and afterwards the DA said he planned to never let anyone ever see this video because no one should have to see such horror inflicted on defenseless children. Iirc, he said after all the appeals have been exhausted he would ask the court for the video to be destroyed so it could never fall in the wrong hands.

Even if the state does have the video I think the Judge would have ruled it inadmissible due to it being too harmful where ZA wouldn't be able to get a fair trial if shown.

I understand why you can't talk about their previous crimes and other behavior. Someone shouldn't be convicted just because they are a rotten human being. But the idea that video of the defendant committing the crime could be considered prejudicial drives me bonkers. I call that proof!
 
It would take quite a bit of time, in my opinion, for the Jury to go over the evidence, their notes and discuss.

They would then have to consider each and every charge. If it took the Judge an hour to read all of it, then I can only imagine the length of time the Jury would have to take to discuss each one. Perhaps not as long as I am thinking.

The removal of the three alternates can make a difference in the verdict as well, depending on how they would have voted.

Time will tell. I, along with all of you, greatly hope for justice for Holly.
 
Letting someone walk who you know is guilty, is absolutely foolishness just because you want to split hairs on 'reasonable doubt."
 
My thoughts about ZA telling KB "That was Shayne."

Excluding JA, I think ZA surrounded himself with guys who would just go along with whatever he wanted, looked up to him, and were fearful of letting him down. Narcissistic. I think ZA had SA go to the coon hunt to check out Holly, maybe some other girls too while he was at it. ZA convinced Shayne to do the actual abduction (so if anything went wrong ZA could simply drive off) with the promise he could be first with Holly. What ZA didn't expect was for SA and DA to talk. I think ZA thought he had enough power over SA that if worse came to worse SA would be the one left holding the bag.

What I don't get is how all of these guys ended up with names that started with A???
 
Here in Ont. Canada jurors were allowed to see the video at trial (Holmoka/Bernardo) it is my understanding from reports in the news several jurors suffered mental health issues after viewing. IIRC several reporters sought out therapy as well.
 
I rewatched the state's closing arguments last night. I couldn't watch JT's again - I managed most of it live and it made me twitchy. Jennifer Nichol's closing did bring me to tears but I had to smile when she was talking about the defense's ballistic expert and she threw in a "bless his heart"

Bless his/her heart has got to be my favorite Southern saying! It covers for about anything w/ a touch of sass but it is taken sympathetically.

Used carefully, it's an excellent thing to throw in. [emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Some get confused about the meaning of reasonable doubt and think if they have doubt about anything at all that's "reasonable doubt." And some people don't have common sense and are not reasonable or can't comprehend instructions given to them. Just hope this jury isn't stuck with those types.
 
[video=twitter;911283806493184000]https://twitter.com/MarandaFaris/status/911283806493184000[/video]
 
Since I've not followed this case, I was unaware of this tip. Have authorities spoke of it and said no info can be provided about it, or is there just speculation that there must have been a tip for them to start looking closely at ZA and the rest of them?

We were never actually told, but at the time there were some educated guesses that made sense. In early 2014, there was some sort of conflict in the ZA world over a theft of some pearls, and within that there were threats made. ZA and others got arrested, and it was rumored he had made threatening remarks to someone (his girlfriend, maybe?) that referenced HB. They actually went from that to a massive search warrant of his property (in which it was assumed they found all sorts of incriminating stuff re the HB case), and the charges regarding HB soon followed. From what we now know, they apparently found absolutely nothing incriminating from that search, which seems odd in retrospect, considering how things have transpired from there.
 
My thoughts about ZA telling KB "That was Shayne."

Excluding JA, I think ZA surrounded himself with guys who would just go along with whatever he wanted, looked up to him, and were fearful of letting him down. Narcissistic. I think ZA had SA go to the coon hunt to check out Holly, maybe some other girls too while he was at it. ZA convinced Shayne to do the actual abduction (so if anything went wrong ZA could simply drive off) with the promise he could be first with Holly. What ZA didn't expect was for SA to talk. I think ZA thought he had enough power over SA that if worse came to worse SA would be the one left holding the bag.

What I don't get is how all of these guys ended up with names that started with A???
Good points!

Fits in with za saying "I couldn't have picked a prettier b__" and "I let Shayne hit it." He took ownership of this crime and put himself in control of it and according to him he decided who, when, what, and where.
 
[video=twitter;911285115883470848]https://twitter.com/CCLawNewz/status/911285115883470848[/video]

[video=twitter;911284947658379265]https://twitter.com/MarandaFaris/status/911284947658379265[/video]

[video=twitter;911284690149093376]https://twitter.com/MarandaFaris/status/911284690149093376[/video]
 
The ADA made it crystal clear in the closing arguments that j autry's testimony has been corroborated many many times.
 
The defense's case has no merit whatsoever.
Gkids are borrowing my iPad again so I'm back to one sentence posts (again). Errr
 
I have not seen one person here saying anything even close to some of the above.

NO ONE has said 'let's just go with them because someone has to pay' or 'it's so sad, and he is bad, so lets send him to death row' OR I am an emotional woman so I don't care about proof.

There are plenty of reasons to believe that Zach is one of the guilty parties in this crime. JMO

Sorry, but I replied directly to someone who said those very things. That's the ONLY reason I replied as I did. Mods later removed the post I replied to, both the original and also the quote in my response, so it sounded like I was just making assumptions, rather than responding to a direct question.
 
IMO the defense case is more like a 'my dog ate my homework' case. Possible, but highly unlikely. Aka a Casey Anthony case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
1,391
Total visitors
1,478

Forum statistics

Threads
599,283
Messages
18,093,881
Members
230,841
Latest member
FastRayne
Back
Top