Hi my WS Friends! So with the hiatus the mods gave us, I have been catching up on the fast moving threads. This bears repeating. Don’t know If the poster is still around....
RavenCC2020Well-Known Member
↑
I don’t believe we have any evidence that CW killed the children. We also don’t have any evidence that SW killed them. But I believe the jury will be presented with a lot to bring reasonable doubt into question. IMO
I'm a fair minded person open to seeing things from both sides. No matter how horrific a crime is it is the duty of a jury to presume the innocence of the defendant therefore up to the prosecutor to convict by the evidence they present.
Unless the defense has some texts, letters, something tangible that prior to these murders SW herself (and can be authenticated) had threatened the lives of her children for ANY reason imo it is just his word against a woman who can no longer speak for herself. If he in fact has someone who can get on the stand under oath and swear they too heard SW make these threats against the kids that would
possibly open the door to reasonable doubt. Surely if any such person exists they would certainly come forward by now to make this claim. If a person making such a claim is an immediate family member I think most people would consider the relationship factor and the position CW is now in and more then likely decide it is a family's desire to save their loved one. Also, if she did indeed make such a claim I would expect a report was made to child services as further proof this transpired. I would assume a family member would be MORE inclined to make such a report given the children are their flesh and blood and were be worried about their safety.
The other factors in this case that would not lead me to a reasonable doubt verdict is CW's actions in his confession.
**** Claiming he saw SW strangling her children and his first reaction to strangle HER. Does not even make the slightest lick of sense. I don't think anyone would buy this. A normal person would pull, shove, or lift SW away from the child she was allegedly strangling and immediately tend to the kids. Attempt CPR being the most logical step for a person even one not well versed in the procedure and or call 911 IMMEDIATELY. Neither actions were taken by him.
**** Let's give CW the benefit of the doubt, he reacted to what he witnessed and strangled his wife, did not call 911 and is now standing around with 3 dead bodies. Even AFTER they are all dead wouldn't he think to call 911 to report it. You know, for the record have the appropriate people on hand to investigate the crime scene in order to confirm HIS story. The crime scene would be fresh and more importantly, any evidence on the children that could prove his innocence would still be there. He did not do this either.
**** So we are to believe that CW having done all the above who "snapped" because his wife killed their children does a 180 and then begins to feel sorry for her, wants to get the bodies out of there to "save her reputation". He is so chiverlous to then disassemble a crime scene, move the bodies bury his wife then put his beloved daughters separately in two oil filled tanks to rot? Hmmmmmmm
**** OK, he has done all the above and is the knight in white armor here so unconcerned that his actions would lead to him being arrested, let's continue to force our common sense aside and further accept his version that he is a hero hell bent on saving his wife's reputation to spare her family and friends, AND risk him going to jail for it.
**** So Nicole unknowingly happens upon the scene because she is concerned about her friend. She states that she knew something was not right due to various factors, door locked in unusual way, car being there with kids seats now in them, no communication from her and her skipping her doctor's appointment.
CW's first lie on record that they were at a friend's house. Dismissing her friends concern.
****
Goes on the air pleading for the return of his family KNOWING that can't possibly happen. Second lie on record. Why continue the act if in fact he is not guilty?? Why the continued charade. Is this not the proper time under the circumstance to fess up?
**** He confesses and now claims it was in fact SW who murdered the children she loved so dearly and he just snapped and killed her with a chain of actions outlined above.
Seriously??? ANY of this would lead an average person to find reasonable doubt? I think it is unreasonable for any average person to find ANY doubt under these circumstances.
If this charade is continued and he chooses to go to trial rather then fully confess to his actions, I do not know what the defense will put on for it's case. I am open to hearing it but again, unless there is something TANGIBLE linking SW to the murder of her children, this guy is going down for ALL the murders. Just my opinion based on what is logical to me.
Last edited: Aug 26, 2018
Aug 26, 2018Report
Unlike