- Joined
- Jan 12, 2016
- Messages
- 16,133
- Reaction score
- 155,208
I heard those pelvic thrusts will drive you insannnnnnnnne.
Sorry, they look like they're attending a Rocky Horror Picture Show dance practice.
Let's do the Time Warp again!
I heard those pelvic thrusts will drive you insannnnnnnnne.
Sorry, they look like they're attending a Rocky Horror Picture Show dance practice.
I hope none! They would be thrown off the jury! MOOHow many jurors do you think will look up her doc and watch it?
I don’t think the jury finds T amusing or funny! Nothing T does imo is funny! I can’t get past looking at her knowing she murdered Gannon.What happens if T testifies and the jury busts out laughing?
This ^^after the expert testified that clinicians can't say negative things about the monster(s) a subject marries and/or their perpetrators.Maybe Prosecution can bring up those awful statements about AS and her other husband in closing arguments.
Point out that it’s an opinion the Dr formed based only on what LS told her and nothing else. Doesn’t give much credibility to the good doctors opinions.
JMO
I'm struggling to follow this case sober, I have no idea how you're keeping up.Tomorrow, In honor of being a witness to the viewing of the Zoom Meeting video of the doctor and 'Maria' aka Natasha Anastasia Broskovonovich ( Russkie assassin extraordinaire ).....I will break open my bottle of Stolichnaya. Top shelf Bloody Mary's on special!!
Nostrovia!
j/k ......sort of....
![]()
Good description!Oh, criminy, I don't even know how to describe it. On the stand, Dr Lewis gave an impression of one of the supposed alternate identities of Marie Moore. It sounded like every person ever from a B movie who gets possessed. It was not fun to experience, unexpectedly, while wearing headphones.
MOO
Notice how she said LS made 'bad choices' and 'mistakes' with her choice of partners, but anything to do with the killing and she didn't know what she was doing?This ^^after the expert testified that clinicians can't say negative things about the monster(s) a subject marries and/or their perpetrators.
One of the reporters covering the case is checking on if/when the Court will release images of the court exhibits to the media which would include the timeline we saw on Monday. Until then, please reference the Media Only thread for referencing various timelines published to date.Does anyone know where I can find a detailed and accurate timeline for this case? Will the one used at trial be made public?
I’ll bring the blinis and caviar.Tomorrow, In honor of being a witness to the viewing of the Zoom Meeting video of the doctor and 'Maria' aka Natasha Anastasia Broskovonovich ( Russkie assassin extraordinaire ).....I will break open my bottle of Stolichnaya. Top shelf Bloody Mary's on special!!
Nostrovia!
j/k ......sort of....
![]()
I'd add on to that that the person Lewis did the creepy impression of more than likely never had DID either, just pretended to. She starved and tortured a young girl to death, with the help of a young teen boy she enlisted as an enforcer and sexually abused. She was no victim.I’ve finally gotten caught up. I really appreciate the posted tweets and summaries.
It sounds like Dr. l never presented clear criteria for diagnosing DID and so her diagnosis is based on hearing LSs tales and the fact that Lewis has seen other people with DID and one of them spoke in a deep scary voice. Was there any expertise demonstrated other than she has seen it in other people she diagnosed as probable DID? It seems analogous to basing a math proof on an assumption.
JMO.
If T is insane, like the defense would have us believe, and has alters who can appear without provocation, why is one of her attorneys chumming with her? Giving us the impression that T is sane and he's safe from her murderous, monsterdrink-wielding Maria?
They tried to present an expert witness who had little more than direct access to T who did what T does -- manipulate.
She had no business turning over her impressions or signing a report, regardless of who generated it.
I might need an adult beverage tomorrow.
Jmo
In assuming you mean after trial - and going with none.How many jurors do you think will look up her doc and watch it?