Dereliction of Duty

[Sustained]

IMO, this case was not lost today, but on Aug 11, 2008 when Deputy Richard Cain did not do his job and investigate the finding by Roy Kronk on Suburban Drive. If Kronk did indeed finds the remains and Cain calls in to the coroner, most likely we would have had some soft tissue/DNA and proof of chloroform in the lungs/soft tissue and possible fingerprints on the duct tape. More importantly, there would have been no evidence of drowning. Even the most liberal "pro-defense" jury could not have ignored that evidence.

 

[KR2tonenow]

Fingerprints or DNA would have nailed it. You are so right!!

 

[JBounds]

Maybe, maybe not. She was probably a skeleton in two weeks. Might not have made a difference.

 

[sappysoul]

Fingerprints or DNA would have nailed it. You are so right!!

After today I would never assume that. There is no way this jury could have given serious consideration to the mountain of evidence they had. They would have found a way to believe George put ICA's DNA and fingerprints at the scene. Evidence meant nothing to them, they relied on rumors and accusations.

 

[DeadCat]

IMO, this case was not lost today, but on Aug 11, 2008 when Deputy Richard Cain did not do his job and investigate the finding by Roy Kronk on Suburban Drive. If Kronk did indeed finds the remains and Cain calls in to the coroner, most likely we would have had some soft tissue/DNA and proof of chloroform in the lungs/soft tissue and possible fingerprints on the duct tape. More importantly, there would have been no evidence of drowning. Even the most liberal "pro-defense" jury could not have ignored that evidence.

interesting observation...I so want to blame someone for this outcome...I've decided the blame lies with the A's for lying so much and generally acting strange both during and outside of court.