GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #14

[SeesSeas]

That's what's going on here. Whether he did it or not, Chris isn't confessing because it really is the truth. He's doing it because at this moment, when his back is up against the wall it is absolutely in his best interest to say he did kill Erin, because it allows him to introduce evidence that greatly reduces his culpability and besides, everyone already thinks he did it anyways. And if he gets a jury to buy the story, he can actually walk free of this completely. The charge of first degree murder, the only charge, is locked in. Double Jeopardy is attached. If they find he didn't plan it, Chris walks away a free man. So whether or not he did this horrific thing, it makes perfect sense to confess. The only place for a confession in court is what comes after the guilty act (actus reus) has been proven: the mens rea phase.

I'll close with this: There is nothing in the physical evidence that puts Chris' hands on that garrote OVER Nichole's. Nothing. That is totally unacceptable in a death penalty case.

^Snipped for focus and BBM

Re: The charge of first degree murder, the only charge, is locked in. Double Jeopardy is attached. If they find he didn't plan it, Chris walks away a free man.

I would be shocked if “Chris walks away a free man.” I don’t think it will happen.
If the jury believes CL’s confession that he ‘snapped’ and therefore the murder wasn’t premeditated, he could still get convicted of a lesser offense than 1[SUP]st[/SUP] degree murder.
If the jury agrees that the evidence proves “beyond reasonable doubt” that CL murdered Erin, CL will be convicted of the crime of murder, even if it’s a lesser offense than 1[SUP]st[/SUP] degree murder.

http://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1310&context=fac_pub
CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON THE LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE DOCTRINE
The lesser included offense doctrine in criminal law generally allows the trier of fact to convict a defendant of an offense that is less serious than the offense with which he was charged in the accusatory pleading.

 

[77DarkHorse7]

Well, if so, then they are still in it together. So finding him NOT GUILTY at this trial would not be a good thing to do. I'd vote GUILTY and then hope the DA went after her next.

Well, the DA made it quite clear that he believes only one person planned, committed and covered up the crime.

Nevertheless, if Chris did in fact commit this crime, I would not want Nichole prosecuted for it as well. This wasn't a cowboy dying at the hands of a cartel's firing squad. One person strangled another person to death with a solo instrument.

 

[77DarkHorse7]

The zip ties also don't fit Chris' story.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[ArianeEmory]

I am confused. Are people on here arguing that CL is innocent and should not be convicted of the crime in which he has confessed to?

We went through this for years (literally) with the Tim Bosma murder trial. One of the two (now convicted) murderers had a fan club of sorts. No point speculating on their motivations.

 

[Knox]

^Snipped for focus and BBM

Re: The charge of first degree murder, the only charge, is locked in. Double Jeopardy is attached. If they find he didn't plan it, Chris walks away a free man.

I would be shocked if “Chris walks away a free man.” I don’t think it will happen.
If the jury believes CL’s confession that he ‘snapped’ and therefore the murder wasn’t premeditated, he could still get convicted of a lesser offense than 1[SUP]st[/SUP] degree murder.
If the jury agrees that the evidence proves “beyond reasonable doubt” that CL murdered Erin, CL will be convicted of the crime of murder, even if it’s a lesser offense than 1[SUP]st[/SUP] degree murder.

http://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1310&context=fac_pub
CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON THE LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE DOCTRINE
The lesser included offense doctrine in criminal law generally allows the trier of fact to convict a defendant of an offense that is less serious than the offense with which he was charged in the accusatory pleading.

To find the murder was not premeditated, the jury would have to discard evidence the State presented. Off the top of my head; computer searches on how to get rid of a body. Multiple conversations with people about how and where to dispose of a body. Erin's body was found in the mine he visited with a friend the week prior. He told Megli he went to a mine no one would ever find. Lee knew Erin was pregnant and there was a chance it might be his. He was exiting the military and leaving for Alaska in a week. Not all the evidence, as I said.

IMO, her murder was clearly premeditated. The lying in wait enhancement would be more difficult to prove.

I think the jury instructions will be very important in this case.

 

[77DarkHorse7]

I can't believe I'm only thinking of this now, and this thought has me shuddering.

I :gaah: shudder to think what it means if Nichole isn't the one who strangled Erin.

That means that Nichole is actually the least culpable person in this whole case. Think of it, she didn't ask for any of this. She didn't do anything wrong that should cause all of this to be inflicted upon her.

Think of the chronology here.

First, she's betrayed, in the worst way, by two of the people she trusted most.

Then, she confronts them but they keep doing it behind her back, anyway.

Then, another close friend calls to tell her she first found out about the betrayal MONTHS ago, but didn't tell her.

Then, one of the betrayers goes missing.

Then, the same "close friend" calls again and actually accuses her of being involved in the disappearance, maintaining her allegiance to the missing betrayer.

Then, her and her husband are dragged into interrogation, and the sheriffs accuse her of being involved.

Then, after she and her hubby are released, the sheriff seizes her home and her car. That's okay, she finds another home, and another car.

Then, the sheriff seizes her other home, and her other car.

Then, there's this HUGE national outpouring of support for the person who betrayed her in the worst way.

Then, she somehow picks up her life once more and goes back home to Alaska.

Then, the media finds out who the suspect is, and suddenly she's being VILIFIED by people who don't know her, because they think she's involved

Then, IN ONE DAY, she finds out the person who used to be her friend is dead, her husband is being arrested and taken to a place she can't easily follow him to, and finds out he might have been planning to kill her as well. Plus, as an added bonus, they take her car away.

Then, two years go by during which she hasn't a clue what's going on, she gets subpoenaed and dragged back out into the desert.

Then, she takes a complement from a juror, which makes another juror start cussing her out and being all loud. and the media spins it as if she was the one who had the temper tantrum, and has a screw loose.

Then, she finds out her husband is now using his and her child in a crazy defense that she'll have to testify to. And while she's being told this, reporters are taking note of her white shoes, which readers will later make fun of on online forums, such as this one.

Seriously, who is this woman? JOB?

You almost want her to be guilty because at least then it would justify all the stupid **** she's been dealing with.

 

[Meemaw12]

To find the murder was not premeditated, the jury would have to discard evidence the State presented. Off the top of my head; computer searches on how to get rid of a body. Multiple conversations with people about how and where to dispose of a body. Erin's body was found in the mine he visited with a friend the week prior. He told Megli he went to a mine no one would ever find. Lee knew Erin was pregnant and there was a chance it might be his. He was exiting the military and leaving for Alaska in a week. Not all the evidence, as I said.

IMO, her murder was clearly premeditated. The lying in wait enhancement would be more difficult to prove.

I think the jury instructions will be very important in this case.

MURDER BY LYING IN WAIT
To constitute murder by lying in wait there must be an intentional infliction upon the person killed of bodily harm involving a high degree of probability that it will result in death and which shows a wanton disregard for human life. The concept of lying in wait does not relieve the prosecution from the burden of proving that the defendant harbored malice aforethought . . .Lying in wait is a waiting and watching for an opportune time to act, together with a concealment by ambush or some other secret design to take the other person by surprise. The lying in wait need not continue for any particular period of time provided that its duration is such as to show a state of mind equivalent to premeditation or deliberation.According to California criminal law, the phrase "lying in wait" describes both a special circumstance and a theory of first degree murder. The factual situation necessary to sustain a jury's finding of lying in wait as a special circumstance is: " `an intentional murder, committed under circumstances which include (1) a concealment of purpose, (2) a substantial period of watching and waiting for an opportune time to act, and (3) immediately thereafter, a surprise attack on an unsuspecting victim from a position of advantage[.]' " People v. Sims, 853 P.2d 992, 1007 (Cal. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 2782 (1994) (quoting People v. Morales, 770 P.2d 244 (Cal.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 984 (1989)).In contrast, the theory of first degree murder by means of lying in wait does not require the intent to murder the victim, but rather, "the intent to watch and wait for the purpose of gaining advantage and taking the victim unawares in order to facilitate the act which constitutes murder." People v. Laws, 15 Cal. Rptr. 2d 668, 674, 12 Cal. App. 4th 786, 795 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993). Moreover, the lying in wait need not continue for any particular period of time, provided that its duration is such as to show a state of mind equivalent to premeditation or deliberation. People v. Ruiz, 749 P.2d 854, 867 (Cal.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 871 (1988)

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m060.htm

Text msgs that EC sent IMO proves the lying in wait.

She went with him believing he had a surprise for her. He lured her out in the middle of nowhere for the purpose of killing her IMO from the evidence I've read presented by the DA.

The unlawful killing of a human being -- homicide -- may be charged as murder or manslaughter. Murder requires a showing of "malice aforethought," which refers to the defendant's intent or state of mind. To prove a murder, the prosecutor must show that the defendant had express or implied malice. Express malice means that the defendant deliberately intended to commit murder. Alternatively, a prosecutor may show implied malice in the defendant's conduct that reflects an "abandoned and malignant heart." Implied malice may arise if the defendant acted without care for another person's safety or behaved with extreme recklessness.

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-first-degree-murder-laws.html


It will be up to the jury to decide who they believe but as we know there can always be one who will never believe even with a confession. I doubt a video of the crime would convenience some.

Tuesday will be interesting as the DA continues with his cross of the monster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[heartgoesout]

I still think she played a part but thats only my opinion. What I found sad was that she was mocked and criticized on her clothing and appearance. Like women don't have enough to deal with. You'd think women would stop being to catty so each other. Question her motives and actions but not her shoes for God sake.
She may not have had anything to do with it. Who knows at this point. But I don't think I'd have very nice things to say about a girl that was sleeping with my husband while babysitting my child and smiling to my face. That's pretty awful. Not to mention thinking my husband was going to propose to her. I'd see fireworks as well. I'd also be convicted on the words that came out of my mouth! Erin didn't deserve to be murdered but I sympathize with NL on that aspect.

 

[jnblsm]

If you mean about the white shoes after Labor Day on here, it was light humor, and not mocking.
If I recall, she was actually complimented on her shoes from a juror and got into trouble for speaking to one.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

[77DarkHorse7]

To find the murder was not premeditated, the jury would have to discard evidence the State presented. Off the top of my head; computer searches on how to get rid of a body. Multiple conversations with people about how and where to dispose of a body. Erin's body was found in the mine he visited with a friend the week prior. He told Megli he went to a mine no one would ever find. Lee knew Erin was pregnant and there was a chance it might be his. He was exiting the military and leaving for Alaska in a week. Not all the evidence, as I said.

IMO, her murder was clearly premeditated. The lying in wait enhancement would be more difficult to prove.

I think the jury instructions will be very important in this case.

Is there anything in the physical evidence that proves this, in your opinion? I think I have tried to stomach all I can of witness testimony.

Because we only have Chris' word about the searches. Biased neighbors. A biased Marine comrade trying to help the organization(whatever those people are called who supervise all the marines down below) escape a black eye. Photos that maybe put Chris in the area around the mine at some point. Photos that didn't even narrow down the sar to less than 100 mines, NOT very specific. A statement from a crazy lady who's scared out of her mind what'll happen if she doesn't testify against the defendant. And again Chris' statements, a liar's statement, that he even knew about the pregnancy.

None of this so-called testimonial "evidence" is even corroborated by anything physical. There's no voice messages, paper, written plans, nothing. No computer search expert evidence whatsoever. Frankly I'm surprised the judge even let some of this garbage in the door, IMO.

 

[Voice4theSilent]

"Mocked and criticized on her clothing and appearance"?! Huh? ONE person made a joke about the old rule of not wearing white after Labor Day and plenty of us stated we, too, wear white after Labor Day.

And her shoes were complimented by a Juror.

She wasn't mocked and criticized. No one is being "catty".

 

[77DarkHorse7]

On the subject of belief. As it stands right now, I believe Chris had something to do with Erin's death. I don't know how, or in what way, but I do. But me believing that doesn't mean bubkus, not a damn thing, without proof. Proof that puts his hands around that weapon at the time it was used to end the victim's life.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[MojaveViper]

Is there anything in the physical evidence that proves this, in your opinion? I think I have tried to stomach all I can of witness testimony.

Because we only have Chris' word about the searches. Biased neighbors. A biased army comrade trying to help the army escape a black eye. Photos that maybe put Chris in the area around the mine at some point. Photos that didn't even narrow down the sar to less than 100 mines, NOT very specific. A statement from a crazy lady who's scared out of her mind what'll happen if she doesn't testify against the defendant. And again Chris' statements, a liar's statement, that he even knew about the pregnancy.

None of this so-called testimonial "evidence" is even corroborated by anything physical. There's no voice messages, paper, written plans, nothing. No computer search expert evidence whatsoever. Frankly I'm surprised the judge even let some of this garbage in the door, IMO.

It's Marine, and Marines. not army. they are not the same and not interchangable.

 

[jnblsm]

"Mocked and criticized on her clothing and appearance"?! Huh? ONE person made a joke about the old rule of not wearing white after Labor Day and plenty of us stated we, too, wear white after Labor Day.

And her shoes were complimented by a Juror.

She wasn't mocked and criticized. No one is being "catty".

Thank you!
I was trying to lighten it up a bit.
Glad some understood it, lol

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

[Knox]

Thank you!
I was trying to lighten it up a bit.
Glad some understood it, lol

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

You did, I laughed out loud 😊

 

[la2cabo]

I'm catching up on all the comments, however, I am disgusted with the story that CL is giving in trying to justify his murdering Erin. Erin's loved ones must feel like she's being murdered all over again. It's deplorable.

 

[Voice4theSilent]

Thank you!
I was trying to lighten it up a bit.
Glad some understood it, lol

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

It was perfect!

 

[la2cabo]

Have any of Erin's friends or family been on here since the trial started? I can't imagine their enormous pain.

 

[truthbeknown]

Have any of Erin's friends or family been on here since the trial started? I can't imagine their enormous pain.

I'm here

 

[la2cabo]

I'm here

Hi Truth - How are you and the family holding up? This has got to be so painful to endure. Please know that you are all in my thoughts and prayers every step of the way. We've got your backs.