CO - James Holmes Trial - *Penalty Phase*

[zoey]

Will C. Holden ‏@will_c_holden · 2m2 minutes ago
#TheaterShooting court planning on clearing courtroom & allowing jury to watch short, faulty DVD using better courtroom equipment.

Larry Ryckman ‏@larryryckman · 1m1 minute ago
Technical follies: Lawyers struggle to figure out how to create a video DVD on a computer that can be played on TV. #theatershooting

Jeffrey Evan Gold ‏@jeffgoldesq · 59s59 seconds ago
#Theatershooting jury confused by word "intended" as to killing child. It does not mean desired or wanted it. Just that kids could be killed

 

[LyndyLoo]

Oh, good grief!!! He shot a six year old 4 TIMES!!!! What part of that do the jury not understand????

I think Mr. Orman explained why he intended to kill a child under 12 well..He said 1) He knew the theatre was full of kids ranging in age months thru to 12 before he even left to get dressed up in his gear 2) His intention to kill everyone in that theatre given his ammunition and weapons he carried. which indicates he intended to kill all including the children under 12.

Pros. does not have to prove he targeted Veronica specifically. He could have killed far more children had his gun not jammed!!!!

 

[zoey]

Do we know what this particular video will show?

 

[StillMindmatters]

Yay Judge Samour!

Hi Chelly (and all others). Preach it my friend, he is an absolute breath of fresh air!!!!

I think I am still suffering residual trauma from the First Amendment shredding, super secretive, incessantly sealing, ceaselessly sidebarring Judge Sherry Stephens. :facepalm::scared:

 

[ahotch2]

I don't think he intentionally killed a child. He himself asked if any children were hurt during interrogation. You have to remember the assault rifle can fire four shots easily within a second or two and we've had witnesses say he was randomly aiming the gun. That being said, he had to know there was a good chance he would kill a child. But I do believe he was hoping not too. I can understand why the jury would have difficulty with this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[zoey]

I think Mr. Orman explained why he intended to kill a child under 12 well..He said 1) He knew the theatre was full of kids ranging in age moths thru to 12 before he even left to get dressed up in his gear 2) His intention to kill everyone in that theatre given his ammunition and weapons he carried. which indicates he intended to kill all including the children under 12.

Pros. does not have to prove he targeted Veronica specifically. He could have killed far more children had his gun not jammed!!!!

I also feel IF police weren't right there he would have figured out something and gone back in for round 2---BUT because he didn't want to get hurt surrendered to police----I truly only think that was why he was "done"

 

[zoey]

Larry Ryckman ‏@larryryckman · 2m2 minutes ago
Jurors need to find that prosecutors proved only one aggravating factor in order to move on to phase 2 in penalty trial. #theatershooting

Carol McKinley ‏@CarolAMcKinley · 1m1 minute ago
Jury may be stuck on word "intentionally" killing a child. Did the defendant really intend to specifically kill a child? #theatershooting

 

[zoey]

Larry Ryckman ‏@larryryckman · 1m1 minute ago
Court back on the record. #theatershooting

Will C. Holden ‏@will_c_holden · 49s50 seconds ago
#TheaterShooting Jury only needs to find 1 aggravator to continue. But penalty phase=weighing process. More aggravators may mean more weight

Larry Ryckman ‏@larryryckman · 41s42 seconds ago
Judge's instruction tells jurors that they can watch the DVD in the cleared courtroom (no live stream, no judge). #theatershooting

 

[Amster]

Didn't he say that his "delusion" meant killing a child gave him greater self worth? Of course he meant to kill a child or many children....

 

[Whiteorchids]

I think Mr. Orman explained why he intended to kill a child under 12 well..He said 1) He knew the theatre was full of kids ranging in age months thru to 12 before he even left to get dressed up in his gear 2) His intention to kill everyone in that theatre given his ammunition and weapons he carried. which indicates he intended to kill all including the children under 12.

Pros. does not have to prove he targeted Veronica specifically. He could have killed far more children had his gun not jammed!!!!

I remember JH telling Reid that he chose 12 midnight showing due to no kids. When I heard "intent" during the jury instructions I thought it was odd they used that wording and I thought for sure defense would object but they didn't which was strange because they object to everything. Defense knew the jury would snag on this just as I did.

 

[zoey]

Didn't he say that his "delusion" meant killing a child gave him greater self worth? Of course he meant to kill a child or many children....

I thought so since they still had so much left to live -- or some other BS like that

 

[atthelake]

:seeya:

Would like to converse here with peeps but WS takes my puter 8 minutes to refresh a page... glad that they aren't viewing on a lappy as 12 folks cannot view a laptop at once lol.

:notgood:

 

[Maisiebelle]

Didn't he say that his "delusion" meant killing a child gave him greater self worth? Of course he meant to kill a child or many children....

I think he told Dr Reid that everyone was worth one point. I think he told someone else something different.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maisiebelle]

:seeya:

Would like to converse here with peeps but WS takes my puter 8 minutes to refresh a page... glad that they aren't viewing on a lappy as 12 folks cannot view a laptop at once lol.

:notgood:

Lol!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Whiteorchids]

I'm worried that jury will think DT lied about this and therefore disregard all the other aggravators. The judge specifically asked if they wanted to change the wording of "intent" both teams said no and moved on to the next aggravator. I thought that was really a stupid decision on the part of DA.

 

[dr dona]

yes I remember reading that killing a child did increase his selfworth more-----but he knew from his training he couldn't aim well so he should have known he would probably kill children..also they are not as experienced as adults at ducking and trying to avoid getting shot. so he has to have known he would kill children....he really just didn't give a d----.

 

[Whiteorchids]

yes I remember reading that killing a child did increase his selfworth more-----but he knew from his training he couldn't aim well so he should have known he would probably kill children..also they are not as experienced as adults at ducking and trying to avoid getting shot. so he has to have known he would kill children....he really just didn't give a d----.

Where did you read this? I never saw that in the notebook or testimony. Maybe I missed it?

 

[StillMindmatters]

I think Mr. Orman explained why he intended to kill a child under 12 well..He said 1) He knew the theatre was full of kids ranging in age months thru to 12 before he even left to get dressed up in his gear 2) His intention to kill everyone in that theatre given his ammunition and weapons he carried. which indicates he intended to kill all including the children under 12.

Pros. does not have to prove he targeted Veronica specifically. He could have killed far more children had his gun not jammed!!!!

I'd have to agree with you Lyndy. It is my understanding that the intent lies in the fact that he planned to kill as many people as he could in one setting, irrespective of age. Furthermore, I contend that he was fully cognizant of the fact that children would be in the theater otherwise he would not have asked, after the fact, if any of the victims were children. It is clear that he was well aware of the possibility that he would kill children but did it anyway. Hence, to me intent has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

There is a difference between "intent" and "targeting", but I don't know how "intent" is being legally defined for the jurors in this case.

 

[MissHaley]

Did the defendant intend to specifically kill a child?
1. Well, he wanted to kill as many people that he could.
2. 400 people in theater.
3. 600 rounds of ammo.
4.There were children in the theater.
5. He was quickly spraying bullets thru the theater.
6. He wasn't or couldn't 'pick & choose' who he aimed at or shot!
7. He wanted to kill whoever was in the theater.

Those would be my points to the jury if I was on it. FWIW

 

[ahotch2]

Jeffrey Evan Gold ‏@jeffgoldesq · 59s59 seconds ago
#Theatershooting jury confused by word "intended" as to killing child. It does not mean desired or wanted it. Just that kids could be killed

I for one can't get my head around how "intended" DOESNT mean wanted or desired.

I guess if that is the definition they are going by then I absolutely agree he "intended" to kill children.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk