FL - Sarah Boone, 42, charged with murdering boyfriend Jorge Torres, 42, by leaving him locked in suitcase, Winter Park, Feb 2020 #2

[jepop]

Were the state allowed to question SB about how she zipped him in and basically grill her over her actions. Idk, I feel they could have done so much more to illuminate her contradictory accounts. Were questions re her initial police interview and the videos off limits to the state?

 

[MTW2011]

For how vigorously the State argued some of their own Motions and against some of the defense’s, that same passion seemed almost not present in their cross.

Like others have shared here, I was also a bit underwhelmed by it. Odd. JMOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I can't believe that Owens was allowed to coach SB through her testimony all the way from where she was born to what age she was when her grandparents died and what the names of her dogs are. As if she's the one reading out an impact statement.

Jorge is the victim here and he has a family and three children who will never hear from him again, including a disabled boy. For the rest of their lives everyone who interacted with JT will have to live with it on their conscience that they knew something wasn't right and should have encouraged him to flee the relationship.

I've never heard of a trial where the court room is being used as a showcase for someone's lies and deceptions.

 

[Luna20]

For how vigorously the State argued some of their own Motions and against some of the defense’s, that same passion seemed almost not present in their cross.

Like others have shared here, I was also a bit underwhelmed by it. Odd. JMOO

Same. They have so much to go from. It’s a flat opening for the state, it could have been dramatic.

Will they bring in a person to show the suitcase with them inside? I hope they do.

 

[Izzylizzy]

I'm not sure if they can cross her a second time after redirect. Perhaps someone else knows. To satisfy murder 2nd degree I believe they have to prove BARD she left him in there negligently knowing he was likely to die ( can't recall legal wording of the charge), failed to unzip him and deliberately left him there knowing he was running out of air. Any reasonable person would know this amounts to leaving someone to die. I think they should have done more on cross to question her about her malicious feelings of revenge if only to.highlight how her ( expected) denials on the stand would contradict with the video which indicates she was vengeful and wanted to teach him a lesson. Jmo

If people didn't know this was a murder trial and a man died in that suitcase you could think you're seeing a demonstration for a piece of luggage and salespeople showing a customer how the zippers work.
I think it's so difficult to get even somewhat in her mind because unless one has lived in such a violent relationship as she has and kept going back for more it's incomprehensible to me.
There's something there that she enjoyed and refused to leave it.
No amount of injuries, arrests, no shame,no embarrassment/humiliation with family, friends neighbors or most importantly no concern for her son that would make her leave Jorge.
She tries to present herself as the selfless one who was saving Jorge from himself while all the time she probably needed him more than he needed her.
If she was able to go through 8 attorneys/firms in a legal system I can't even begin to imagine what she was like to live with no less have her as a client.

 

[jepop]

I also understood only one zipper worked but was missing the "pull" and they (SB/JT) planned on filling it with used things to go to a donation box. And then Owens had a melt down because the paperclip may have been attached the wrong direction for defense demonstration purposes versus when the state presented the suitcase which I think was without the paperclip! Judge had to take him by the hand and ask if there was an objection...

Wow. Owens has to be somewhat of an hysteric jmo to take on this case in the first place I reckon. Looking forward to watching. Will check it out in about 8 hours and hopefully figure the zipper situ BARD lol. My recall was that neither had a tab and only one of the two had a paper clip ( from when it was entered into evidence) but definitely not sure my memory is accurate. If there was no easy option then imo it shows that SB also needed to apply that extra bit of effort to effectively seal JT in suit case and leave him to die. Moo

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

For how vigorously the State argued some of their own Motions and against some of the defense’s, that same passion seemed almost not present in their cross.

Like others have shared here, I was also a bit underwhelmed by it. Odd. JMOO

Maybe they're taking it easy because all the boxes are ticked - did SB deprive JT of his liberty, did she zip him in a tiny case where he ultimately was unable to breathe and died of suffocation, did she prevent him from trying to escape the tiny suitcase by battering his fingers with a baseball bat, did she further also assault him causing severe injuries to the point she bruised her own hand using the baseball bat, did she mock and deride him, did she fail to call emergencies services, did she subsequently use her phone to make calls but not for getting help, did she sleep very well for a long time, did she wake up and then ring her ex husband three times but fail to ring 911 once...

She's quite literally admitted to all of the above multiple times on record and now in court to the jury. Is any jury going to find in her favour that this was all an understandable course of action if her and JT weren't getting along? I would sincerely doubt it.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Same. They have so much to go from. It’s a flat opening for the state, it could have been dramatic.

Will they bring in a person to show the suitcase with them inside? I hope they do.

There was some earlier up thread discussion on this. IANAL but my vote on the latter point is no. An emphatic no.

There is that case in Los Angeles in the mid 1990s where the prosecution made a major miscue asking the defendant to try on a pair of gloves. Same potential problem and pitfalls exists here IMO. And the outcome would be unknown. A fatal error to do such IMO.

And with all the questions about an underwhelming cross of SB it would seem unwise to tempt fate with an unknown suitcase demonstration.

There are SB videos showing the now deceased victim JT in it. Alive. Requesting to be freed. And he could not escape. And she did not release him.

There is IMO no need to recreate anything or try and get creative with the suitcase. It was for lack of a better term JT’s coffin and tomb. MOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

There was some earlier up thread discussion on this. IANAL but my vote on the latter point is no. An emphatic no.

There is that case in Los Angeles in the mid 1990s where the prosecution made a major miscue asking the defendant to try on a pair of gloves. Same potential problem and pitfalls exists here IMO. And the outcome would be unknown. A fatal error to do such IMO.

And with all the questions about an underwhelming cross of SB it would seem unwise to tempt fate with an unknown suitcase demonstration.

There are SB videos showing the now deceased victim JT in it. Alive. Requesting to be freed. And he could not escape. And she did not release him.

There is IMO no need to recreate anything or try and get creative with the suitcase. It was for lack of a better term JT’s coffin and tomb

Agree. Although I think the state could have used a computer generated 3D image to show exactly the position JT was in inside that case, how his knees would have been up around his chin and his arms tightly packed like a foetus in the womb, he didn't have wiggle room or leverage or any way to re-arrange himself.

Someone in a forum suggested SB may have tricked him by easing him in to their 'good day' super chill with puzzles and then challenging him to try and get out the case like Houdini 'I bet you can't...'

 

[citizen_sleuth]

For how vigorously the State argued some of their own Motions and against some of the defense’s, that same passion seemed almost not present in their cross.

Like others have shared here, I was also a bit underwhelmed by it. Odd. JMOO

I agree, although I wonder if perhaps the prosecution could tell the jury wasn't buying what SB was saying during direct and felt like drilling into her on cross might risk alienating them?

 

[Izzylizzy]

Maybe they're taking it easy because all the boxes are ticked - did SB deprive JT of his liberty, did she zip him in a tiny case where he ultimately was unable to breathe and died of suffocation, did she prevent him from trying to escape the tiny suitcase by battering his fingers with a baseball bat, did she further also assault him causing severe injuries to the point she bruised her own hand using the baseball bat, did she mock and deride him, did she fail to call emergencies services, did she subsequently use her phone to make calls but not for getting help, did she sleep very well for a long time, did she wake up and then ring her ex husband three times but fail to ring 911 once...

She's quite literally admitted to all of the above multiple times on record and now in court to the jury. Is any jury going to find in her favour that this was all an understandable course of action if her and JT weren't getting along? I would sincerely doubt it.

YES!
Thank you and send it to the prosecutors for their closing..lol

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I agree, although I wonder if perhaps the prosecution could tell the jury wasn't buying what SB was saying during direct and felt like drilling into her on cross might risk alienating them?

I also feel there were episodes where Owens threw his own client under the bus - for example he called the suitcase a briefcase. For example, he facilitated his client to elaborate on how she had shoved the baseball bat inside the gap in the zipper to further batter around JT and got her to agree she had bruised her own hand doing so (we hadn't heard about that anywhere before). SB could have said she incurred bruises fighting off JT but not any more.

She could have said she bashed JT around with the bat to keep him off her but no, he was already captive inside a tiny suitcase, by her own words.

We also find out that she made a phone call and didn't just black out / pass out when she went upstairs. She made a call and was awake for half an hour or so. Who'd she call?

 

[Izzylizzy]

I also feel there were episodes where Owens threw his own client under the bus - for example he called the suitcase a briefcase. For example, he facilitated his client to elaborate on how she had shoved the baseball bat inside the gap in the zipper to further batter around JT and got her to agree she had bruised her own hand doing so (we hadn't heard about that anywhere before). SB could have said she incurred bruises fighting off JT but not any more.

She could have said she bashed JT around with the bat to keep him off her but no, he was already captive inside a tiny suitcase, by her own words.

We also find out that she made a phone call and didn't just black out / pass out when she went upstairs. She made a call and was awake for half an hour or so. Who'd she call?

The prosecutors' didn't go any further with that?
I would think that whoever she called would have been disposed by the state and used as a witness for them.
She was chatting away as Jorge was dying from a lack of oxygen.
Maybe one of the gals who the prosecutor named that Jorge was in contact with, Christine for example?
Brian is her usual go-to and I'm surprised that he wasn't a witness for the state for much more than what took place on the 911 day and how she wasn't even responsible enough to be counted on to pick up their son from school.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

The prosecutors' didn't go any further with that?
I would think that whoever she called would have been disposed by the state and used as a witness for them.
She was chatting away as Jorge was dying from a lack of oxygen.
Maybe one of the gals who the prosecutor named that Jorge was in contact with, Christine for example?
Brian is her usual go-to and I'm surprised that he wasn't a witness for the state for much more than what took place on the 911 day and how she wasn't even responsible enough to be counted on to pick up their son from school.

As soon as SB is stood down from the stand, the state prosecution are at free liberty to call in all their witnesses and evidence to rebut what she's said. They don't have to go brutal on her on cross examination. Also, as the Judge said, if she has provenly lied / fabricated or her accounts directly conflict with one another, the whole testimony can be struck.

Re BB ex husband, he will possibly be called back because surely the jury and all of us deserve to know exactly what SB said to him when she called him.

Also JT's brother - I think this may be the same one who is incarcerated and also beat him badly but will he be asked for his account of what communications were going on between himself and SB? SB triangulates and manipulates, this has even been noted by the jail staff in write ups. Was SB the cause of JT's brother bashing him?

 

[Izzylizzy]

I agree, although I wonder if perhaps the prosecution could tell the jury wasn't buying what SB was saying during direct and felt like drilling into her on cross might risk alienating them?

Maybe they're walking that fine line that's been advised when the defense is "BWS"?

 

[Izzylizzy]

As soon as SB is stood down from the stand, the state prosecution are at free liberty to call in all their witnesses and evidence to rebut what she's said. They don't have to go brutal on her on cross examination. Also, as the Judge said, if she has provenly lied / fabricated or her accounts directly conflict with one another, the whole testimony can be struck.

Re BB ex husband, he will possibly be called back because surely the jury and all of us deserve to know exactly what SB said to him when she called him.

Also JT's brother - I think this may be the same one who is incarcerated and also beat him badly but will he be asked for his account of what communications were going on between himself and SB? SB triangulates and manipulates, this has even been noted by the jail staff in write ups. Was SB the cause of JT's brother bashing him?

Now that you mention JT's brother I'm curious if that is or part of the reason why AB claimed to LE during all her interrogations that JT's family hates her.
She just may have been the instigator between the brothers.
Is that the event that Jorge did time for?
he had to have facial reconstructive surgery according to SB.
Jorge was on probation when he died and also mandated by the court to some kind of anger management therapy.

 

[Izzylizzy]

As soon as SB is stood down from the stand, the state prosecution are at free liberty to call in all their witnesses and evidence to rebut what she's said. They don't have to go brutal on her on cross examination. Also, as the Judge said, if she has provenly lied / fabricated or her accounts directly conflict with one another, the whole testimony can be struck.

Re BB ex husband, he will possibly be called back because surely the jury and all of us deserve to know exactly what SB said to him when she called him.

Also JT's brother - I think this may be the same one who is incarcerated and also beat him badly but will he be asked for his account of what communications were going on between himself and SB? SB triangulates and manipulates, this has even been noted by the jail staff in write ups. Was SB the cause of JT's brother bashing him?

I'm so pleased that you know how this all works.
I certainly don't.
Thanks again.

 

[nodamselindistress]

Evidently SB disagreed with her attorneys' strategy to not seek JT's medical records into evidence. She wanted them in, her attorneys did not. It must have been a big enough deal because the Judge got involved and clarified with her that she was still in agreement with her attorneys' strategy and still pleased with their performance.

I am waiting and watching her, if she feels it is going sideways is she going to tell the judge she is no longer happy with counsel?

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Evidently SB disagreed with her attorneys' strategy to not seek JT's medical records into evidence. She wanted them in, her attorneys did not. It must have been a big enough deal because the Judge got involved and clarified with her that she was still in agreement with her attorneys' strategy and still pleased with their performance.

I am waiting and watching her, if she feels it is going sideways is she going to tell the judge she is no longer happy with counsel?

It's inevitable! Once she's no longer on the stand and a few awkward questions get asked, she'll realise that she's still going down for murder and it'll all be Owens' fault JMO

 

[Izzylizzy]

This is perfect for your trip Ms. Boone