Cesar Laurean's Trial

[GeekyGirl]

Geeky Girl somewhere along the way her phone was chucked out on the side of 17 near the base. I don't even know if it was that day. Mary testified that she tried to call Maria after her room mate called that Maria's phone went to voice mail straight away

Yes, I remember this... which is yet another piece of the puzzle that has always bothered me. Based on where it was found, if you believe she threw it out herself, she had to have done so just after getting the money from the ATM. But why? So they couldn't track her by GPS? Why not just turn it off, or wait until she'd actually left Jacksonville to toss it? Just another strange fact, in a very strange case.

 

[Topsail Girl]

GEEKYGIRL - IN YOUR OWN WORDS - I'M RIGHT THERE WITH YOU!! LOL

Ooopss sorry about the caps - I wasn't yelling at you LOL

 

[GeekyGirl]

GEEKYGIRL - IN YOUR OWN WORDS - I'M RIGHT THERE WITH YOU!! LOL

Ooopss sorry about the caps - I wasn't yelling at you LOL

No worries

 

[Topsail Girl]

The one thing I can't recall Cecil Jones testified he found the phone on the shoulder of 17 and I'm pretty sure he said if he was headed to or from the base but I din't write which direction in my notes. I'm going to WRAL to see if they have an exerpt of hisa testimony. Does anyone remember for sure?

 

[panthera]

State argument against including 2nd degree murder as a lesser included charge. Defense argument wants it included.

 

[Topsail Girl]

Nothing at WRAL darn it.

 

[panthera]

Judge is asking the defense what the evidence is that takes away premeditation when the crowbar was used to strike Maria's head. Defense is arguing that Maria came to his residence and there is only speculation as to her state of mind. The judge is saying that if the jury does not find premeditation they are duty bound to find a not guilty verdict.

 

[snowshuze]

Judge rules two options:
1st degree murder
not guilty

 

[panthera]

Judge rules two options:
1st degree murder
not guilty

Right now the defense is arguing against the felony murder inclusion.

(they have a point with this one, imo)

 

[panthera]

Judge rules felony murder will be included.

 

[GeekyGirl]

The one thing I can't recall Cecil Jones testified he found the phone on the shoulder of 17 and I'm pretty sure he said if he was headed to or from the base but I din't write which direction in my notes. I'm going to WRAL to see if they have an exerpt of hisa testimony. Does anyone remember for sure?

IIRC he found it on the side of the westbound lanes of 24, just before the overpass that leads to the main gate. I know JDNews did an article about it...

 

[GeekyGirl]

Right now the defense is arguing against the felony murder inclusion.

(they have a point with this one, imo)

Just curious, what was their argument against the felony murder rule?

IMO I'm sort of surprised that he's not icluding the lesser charge, but I suppose there is a reason why he's the judge and I'm not.

 

[panthera]

Just curious, what was their argument against the felony murder rule?

IMO I'm sort of surprised that he's not icluding the lesser charge, but I suppose there is a reason why he's the judge and I'm not.

Basically that the "robbery" (use of ATM card) didn't occur until some time after the murder was committed. Judge said (paraphrased) the felony murder rule is the continuation of a crime, i.e. the card was able to be used as a result of the murder. I assume the same applies in regard to the use of her car. MOO

 

[GeekyGirl]

Basically that the "robbery" (use of ATM card) didn't occur until some time after the murder was committed. Judge said (paraphrased) the felony murder rule is the continuation of a crime, i.e. the card was able to be used as a result of the murder. I assume the same applies in regard to the use of her car. MOO

Interesting, I can see that being grounds for appeal if he's convicted. I couldn't find any specific case law that defined the time frame allowed in the "interrelationship" between the two crimes. Though there was one case that specifically mentioned that a body was considered a person if the robbery occured in a "short period" after the murder.

 

[Topsail Girl]

IIRC he found it on the side of the westbound lanes of 24, just before the overpass that leads to the main gate. I know JDNews did an article about it...

Well then assuming she is the one that threw her phone out of the window as she was headed onto base that would have to havebeen after she was at the bus station right? Or was it on the way to work that morning....hhmmmm

 

[panthera]

Interesting, I can see that being grounds for appeal if he's convicted. I couldn't find any specific case law that defined the time frame allowed in the "interrelationship" between the two crimes. Though there was one case that specifically mentioned that a body was considered a person if the robbery occured in a "short period" after the murder.

I can understand the unauthorized use of the ATM card being a separate charge but I am still not connecting it to the murder itself, especially being the time lapse between when the state contends she was killed in relation to when he used the card. :waitasec:

 

[GeekyGirl]

I can understand the unauthorized use of the ATM card being a separate charge but I am still not connecting it to the murder itself, especially being the time lapse between when the state contends she was killed in relation to when he used the card. :waitasec:

If he took the card off the body, and that's how he came to be in possesion of it, then I think the state can claim robbery. The fact that he used it is proof that it was in his possesion, not the actual robbery itself... I think?:waitasec:

 

[GeekyGirl]

Well then assuming she is the one that threw her phone out of the window as she was headed onto base that would have to havebeen after she was at the bus station right? Or was it on the way to work that morning....hhmmmm

I don't think so... If she left Dunham's, went to the ATM, the bus station and then CL's, the only time she would have been on 24W before the main gate would be between the ATM withdrawal and the bus station. MOO

 

[panthera]

If he took the card off the body, and that's how he came to be in possesion of it, then I think the state can claim robbery. The fact that he used it is proof that it was in his possesion, not the actual robbery itself... I think?:waitasec:

How can they determine she had the card on her person and not in her wallet which could've been (hypothetically) in an unlocked car when she stopped by his house?

 

[panthera]

I don't think so... If she left Dunham's, went to the ATM, the bus station and then CL's, the only time she would have been on 24W before the main gate would be between the ATM withdrawal and the bus station. MOO

What about her being at the Christmas party, if true?