CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #50 *ARREST*

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #1,021
Tums, I believe. PF had a tummy ache.
So she could have even gone to the Conoco for that if they were open that night. They may not be a 24 hour store, the ones around here are and they dont close on Thanksgiving anymore.
I'm not sure we have the whole story even about that night!
It "appears" she may have gone home and was called back out to bring him medicine.
Do we know if either home had a landline or only cell phones?

If it was "tum's" what a baby! There are places he could have gone to himself. I'm guessing his mom wouldn't go get them.
Whatever happened to using baking soda for a tummy ache?
Surely "mom" was familiar with that age old remedy!

At any rate, that was a part of his "brilliant plan" to kill KB and get away with it!
PF disgusts me!!!
Moo
 
  • #1,022
I’m not sure what is unethical about calling a witness to testify?

I mean obviously SF testimony wasn’t needed.

But was it really unethical for DA May to call on her?

Seems like a stretch to me.

Just bc the defense claims it doesn’t necessarily mean it is. And in this case I certainly wouldn’t have considered it as unethical. Moo
 
  • #1,023
Focusing on your specific question BBM:
  • If you're DA May, you take full advantage of the fact that you have in PF the world's biggest moron. You carefully, methodically point out to the jury each and every neon flashing bread crumb PF dropped along the way that points in a direct, unwavering line to him as the killer.
  • You obtain cooperation from someone PF, aka the world's biggest moron, solicited to commit the murder and who assisted him after the murder in cleaning the crime scene, destroying evidence, and disposing of the murder victim's body; namely, you make a deal with KK and put her up on the stand to give her damning testimony.
  • You lay out the plethora of evidence you've gathered including but not limited to: cell phone pings, tracking data, texts, blood, DNA, video footage, receipts, witness testimony, PF's lying statements to CB and others, etc. (*This step alone will likely take several days, if not weeks, owing to the extreme moronicity of PF, who has fortunately left DA May a veritable treasure trove of damning evidence to present to a jury).
  • You make sure you're extremely careful to select educated, bright, rational, logical individuals to sit on the jury, making liberal use of your peremptory challenges to ditch any irrational, dumb, conspiracy theorist, devil's advocate, and/or my-feelings-trump-the-facts types. Jury selection is probably the most important part of this trial, and the only area in which the prosecution has any vulnerability; however, I do think DA May will be alert and up to the task of making sure no fruit loops slip through the cracks.
  • Also, while it's probably not absolutely essential to securing a conviction, if I were DA May, a baseball bat would definitely be used in my closing arguments. I would leave the jury with an indelible image of what KB's final horrific, painful, terrifying moments were like in that townhome.
I'm not at all concerned that we'll see an outcome in this case like in the CA case. In that case, there was no KK hanging her out to dry, more's the pity. Also, in that specific case, you had assembled one of the most incompetent juries ever known to mankind, aside from the OJ jury, which was hands-down the biggest bunch of halfwits ever assembled in a courtroom.

DA May impresses me as being an extremely bright, facile, skilled prosecutor who has shown by virtue of the sweetie beauty of a deal he made with KK that he is fully committed to one end: securing a conviction against the evil piece of excrement, PF.

DA May is going to swing for the fences in that courtroom, and he is going to hit the prosecution ball out of the park.

It's the public defender who's going to be asking to borrow the bat when the trial's over, just so that he can hit himself over the head repeatedly with it in frustration over his no-win case featuring the world's biggest dunderhead for a client.

Of course, there's always the possibility that when the public defender gets done conking himself over the head with the DA's bat, he may turn it on his depraved moron of a client, so there's that.

All of the Above: JMO.

Wish I could triple like this post GK. Perfect!
 
  • #1,024
I’m not sure what is unethical about calling a witness to testify?

I mean obviously SF testimony wasn’t needed.

But was it really unethical for DA May to call on her?

Seems like a stretch to me.

Just bc the defense claims it doesn’t necessarily mean it is. And in this case I certainly wouldn’t have considered it as unethical. Moo
And my concern, is where all of this is heading.

First the DA behaves in a way that is “unethical.”

Then people start saying that poor PF’s rights are being violated.

Then, an innocent man is on trial for murder.

Then, PF is “railroaded.”

Then, an innocent man is convicted for a murder that KK committed (despite no evidence for this claim).

A narrative based on zero facts, is inherently a work of fiction.

PF is solely responsible for the situation he is in.
 
Last edited:
  • #1,025
I’m not sure what is unethical about calling a witness to testify?

I mean obviously SF testimony wasn’t needed.

But was it really unethical for DA May to call on her?

Seems like a stretch to me.

Just bc the defense claims it doesn’t necessarily mean it is. And in this case I certainly wouldn’t have considered it as unethical. Moo
Unethical isn't really the term. I believe that SF's attorney believed she was going to be asked questions that really get outside the scope of what a preliminary hearing is for and that was the objection. The judge didn't really address it or the 5th amendment issue since it became moot.
For the record, I don't think SF will plead the 5th if called to testify at trial. I think she will answer questions about PF's coming and going on TG. As for the tote, I bet she will just testify that she saw PF burning stuff, KK was there. Even if she saw the tote burning, I am sure she will testify she never saw what was in it. So, the prosecutor may call her just to verify KK's claim that the tote was burned then and there, but that is probably all. I would think a more useful area to question her on would be her knowledge of any custody dispute or financial arrangements, if PF mentioned trying to obtain custody etc.
 
  • #1,026
And my concern, is where all of this is leading.

First the DA behaves in a way that is “unethical.”

Then people start saying that poor PF’s rights are being violated.

Then, an innocent man is on trial for murder.

Then, PF is “railroaded.”

Then, an innocent man is convicted for a murder that KK committed (despite no evidence for this claim).

A narrative based on zero facts, is inherently a work of fiction.

PF’s defense will say all of that and more. They will throw mud at the wall and hope something sticks. It won’t stick. The facts are there, PF is going away for life. You have helped convince me of that!
 
  • #1,027
PF’s defense will say all of that and more. They will throw mud at the wall and hope something sticks. It won’t stick. The facts are there, PF is going away for life. You have helped convince me of that!
I was convinced before even seeing those warrants.

I never imagined that PF left such an extensive and damning trail of lies and deception.

I should have, but gave him far more credit than he is deserving of.

You could make a compelling case on his phone activity alone.

There’s so much more than that too.
 
  • #1,028
And my concern, is where all of this is heading.

First the DA behaves in a way that is “unethical.”

Then people start saying that poor PF’s rights are being violated.

Then, an innocent man is on trial for murder.

Then, PF is “railroaded.”

Then, an innocent man is convicted for a murder that KK committed (despite no evidence for this claim).

A narrative based on zero facts, is inherently a work of fiction.

PF is solely responsible for the situation he is in.
There is absolutely nothing "unethical" about what "Dan the Man" DA May did in calling SF to the stand. It's quite possible he even anticipated the judges response. What he did was ingenious even though SF didn't talk. It showed everyone, including us (:)) that SF had something to hide and that alone makes her unsuitable for custody of baby K. DA May knew that too. It was a gesture of kindness, a courtesy to the B's, a reassurance that he was "batting" for them. He's a smart man. He already knew he had enough to go to trial. All MOO, of course.
 
  • #1,029
There is absolutely nothing "unethical" about what "Dan the Man" DA May did in calling SF to the stand. It's quite possible he even anticipated the judges response. What he did was ingenious even though SF didn't talk. It showed everyone, including us :))) that SF had something to hide and that alone makes her unsuitable for custody of baby K. DA May knew that too. It was a gesture of kindness, a courtesy to the B's, a reassurance that he was "batting" for them. He's a smart man. He already knew he had enough to go to trial. All MOO, of course.
Well that would be unethical and an abuse of process. But I don't think he was trying to do that. I think he was trying to do what SF's attorney believed, which was essentially take her deposition.
 
Last edited:
  • #1,030
Well that would be unethical and an abuse of process. But I don't think he was trying to that. I think he was trying to do what SF's attorney believe, which was essentially take her deposition.
Well, you may be right about that. All I have to add is, it's a good thing I'm not a lawyer :)
 
  • #1,031
Moronicity.....my new favorite word. Thank you @GordionKnot. One of the best things about WS, besides the people, are the new things we learn. Today I have learned a new word to add to my vocabulary, that I can use in mixed company and is fairly PC! Thanks again. I love it!
 
  • #1,032
I don't think PF intended to completely cremate the remains. I think he intended to damage or destroy as much evidence as he could and reduce the physical remains that would have to be 'scooped' up and disposed of elsewhere.

It's really no different than burning a huge pile of yard waste (where it's legal) so you have a much smaller pile to bury or haul away.

I don't know how much the remains of a human weigh after burned for hours, but water loss alone would account for weight loss and smaller size. (Sorry to be graphic).

In short, I think he would have had a relatively small and easily managed pile of remains to deal with, whether he was going to conceal them or further destroy them.
The other thing PF would have eliminated with the burning was the smell. He could have then held onto the remains for a bit before disposal.
 
Last edited:
  • #1,033
Tums, I believe. PF had a tummy ache.
I doubt she drove that far for just Tums. That would surely have been available at the gas stations close by. IIrc they mentioned he had ulcer issues, so I guess it was an acid reducer like Omeprazole. That you would have to go to a real pharmacy, such as Walmart or CVS.
 
  • #1,034
I doubt she drove that far for just Tums. That would surely have been available at the gas stations close by. IIrc they mentioned he had ulcer issues, so I guess it was an acid reducer like Omeprazole. That you would have to go to a real pharmacy, such as Walmart or CVS.
I think whatever it was she was after was something more substantial than what she could get at a gas station. The question is, did he really need that medicine, or did he have an ulterior motive for sending her? Not clear yet.
 
  • #1,035
I was convinced before even seeing those warrants.

I never imagined that PF left such an extensive and damning trail of lies and deception.

I should have, but gave him far more credit than he is deserving of.

You could make a compelling case on his phone activity alone.

There’s so much more than that too.

Yep, and I’m sure PF is a defense attorneys worst nightmare, he’s also crass and has a very degrading tone of voice. Mix that in with the scowl he carries on his face. And top it all off with the dumb after the fact things he did.
 
  • #1,036
I was convinced before even seeing those warrants.

I never imagined that PF left such an extensive and damning trail of lies and deception.

I should have, but gave him far more credit than he is deserving of.

You could make a compelling case on his phone activity alone.

There’s so much more than that too.
BBM:
Clearly, that's simply because you're a nice guy who tries to give people the benefit of the doubt. There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to give people the presumption of a working brain. Don't be too hard on yourself, you have absolutely no reason whatsoever to beat yourself up for giving PF some credit initially.

You've more than made up for lost time, so it's okay that you showed up fashionably late.
Nobody scorches PF's frazeed hide quite so effectively as you!

Frankly, as someone who never for one moment gave PF an ounce of credit,
I do have to admit seeing those warrants left me feeling entirely vindicated re: everything we've all been saying about him from the beginning.

He's. so. stupid.

JMO.
 
  • #1,037
I doubt she drove that far for just Tums. That would surely have been available at the gas stations close by. IIrc they mentioned he had ulcer issues, so I guess it was an acid reducer like Omeprazole. That you would have to go to a real pharmacy, such as Walmart or CVS.
According to the Affidavit, it was just an over-the-counter antacid. I think it was Tums. Imo
 
Last edited:
  • #1,038
Yup, I agree with all of what you say. I too doubt that she participated in the murder or the fire/moving the body (if I implied that I did, I mis-posted). But there is something that she and her lawyer believes will incriminate her, not PF, but her, and I'm really curious what it is. It may wind up being more trouble than it's worth to call her to the stand and then charge her with contempt when she refuses to testify, as you say. So, we'll probably never know.

was it SF or PF who was paying the family plan Verizon bill?
 
  • #1,039
And my concern, is where all of this is heading.

First the DA behaves in a way that is “unethical.”

Then people start saying that poor PF’s rights are being violated.

Then, an innocent man is on trial for murder.

Then, PF is “railroaded.”

Then, an innocent man is convicted for a murder that KK committed (despite no evidence for this claim).

A narrative based on zero facts, is inherently a work of fiction.

PF is solely responsible for the situation he is in.
I agree completely. In fact, there are facts that dispute these theories. To me, the most blatant, and the real deal breaker, is the fact that he was carrying her phone around with him. That links him to her death since he would not have had her phone otherwise. He was calling himself on her phone and carrying on a conversation. I sort of visualize him with her phone on one ear and his phone on the other ear. There is just no way that I could imagine that he could ever overcome those facts.
 
  • #1,040
It seems unusual to me, also. During calving, some ranchers might go out off and on to check for calving problems at night, but 99% of ranchers aren't calving around Thanksgiving. I don't know if PF had started winter feeding yet, but that only takes generally less than an hour to roll out a bale or two of hay. If there was a well problem, that might take a while. I don't think we know when the trip to the cattle started, but with the two not getting along and this was the last day of the flight instructor's life, it seems unusual, maybe some sort of premeditated psychological calculated calm before the storm. ( More pulling the wool "sweater" over her eyes.)

if they were out in remote rough areas, how do you even find/see the cattle? In Nov it gets dark early.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
2,190
Total visitors
2,295

Forum statistics

Threads
632,725
Messages
18,630,968
Members
243,274
Latest member
WickedGlow
Back
Top