GUILTY FL - Sarah Boone, 42, charged with murdering boyfriend Jorge Torres, 42, by leaving him locked in suitcase, Winter Park, Feb 2020 #3

[ShadyLady]

SB not looking so smug and smiley today.

 

[jepop]

They need a robotic voice that reads with an even, neutral tone. MOO

They should have got Siri or Alexa to do it

 

[sasha17]

Defense will not present a rebuttal to the state's rebuttal.

I'm surprised by this. Why wouldn't the defense take this opportunity to present a rebuttal?

 

[Megnut]

Courtroom is live, outside presence of the jury, to battle out jury instructions.

Tedious to be sure but gives some insight into what the jury will have to answer.

 

[Izzylizzy]

He has been hard to take at times, but there is no doubt that Mr. Owens is fully 100% doing his best to represent SB. Not his fault she decided to video her own demise.

I watched Peter LYK last night and he spent over an hour (ugh) with state's female psychiatrist going over Owen's objections and arguments.
He did credit Owens quite a few times but

I was disappointed in the show thinking the videos would be the highlight.
I think his poll showed that 85%ish of his members thought the videos helped the state.

 

[ShadyLady]

IMO...SB showed no remorse the next day. All empty words and covering her $$$$.

It was all a power trip for her. I hope jury sees that. And as how someone else commented: This time she did not call LE. She had no fear.

 

[nodamselindistress]

Where is Owens? Did I miss something? Went out for a walk, so probably missed it.

 

[Megnut]

Anyone else listening to the live?

1. It's bizarre that a room full of highly educated men are debating events as SB reported them. Like sweatered ninjas exist! (Reference another trial, where the defendant took to the stand with an outlandish claim.) "They were still laughing and having a good time...." "Mr. Torres hand came out of the suitcase...." "She was poking him with a bat...." How does anyone argue the merit of an untruth? I suppose it's the only way, regardless of whether you believe her, to get to her mindset.

2. Neither side sounds like they know exactly what the crime is, the order, and what instruction applies. Can no one articulate their position in two sentences, clearly and concisely?

 

[Megnut]

Where is Owens? Did I miss something? Went out for a walk, so probably missed it.

He's probably working on his closing argument.

JMO

 

[ShadyLady]

Anyone else listening to the live?

1. It's bizarre that a room full of highly educated men are debating events as SB reported them. Like sweatered ninjas exist! (Reference another trial, where the defendant took to the stand with an outlandish claim.) "They were still laughing and having a good time...." "Mr. Torres hand came out of the suitcase...." "She was poking him with a bat...." How does anyone argue the merit of an untruth? I suppose it's the only way, regardless of whether you believe her, to get to her mindset.

2. Neither side sounds like they know exactly what the crime is, the order, and what instruction applies. Can no one articulate their position in two sentences, clearly and concisely?

For sure SB was not credible at all. And there was no fear, if there was she would have called LE. I think she intentionally murdered him. But, I realize it would be hard to prove.

I remember a text where she mentioned hide and sneak. Did she trick him into the suitcase? Or knock him out first? My mind goes places....

 

[Megnut]

This just hit me. It feels like a mock trial, with a hypothetical case.

Assuming these facts, then....

The assumed facts here are the ones she supplied! So they're arguing at what point the laughing stopped.

But there's no evidence anyone was laughing!

It's almost like there's two cases, a case within a case.

If SB perceived JT to be a threat, was she obligated to retreat? If she's the aggressor, does that law apply? Did she hit (poke) him with the bat because she was acting in self-defense or because she was mad (and out of control)?

The State might have been better served to argue against BSS and recognize SB as the aggressor, start to finish.

I wonder what this trial would have looked like with Attorneys 1-7.

Test case for train wreck.

JMO

 

[Seattle1]

10/23/24

 

[Seattle1]

2020-CF-002603-A-O : STATE OF FLORIDA - VS - BOONE, SARAH

https://myeclerk.myorangeclerk.com/CaseDetails?cItem=3t5mIvASe2obkOXh7sVAlLPqCWPAHNqG9ZL%2Fml7mJAfBKuy0x8nHq978ghbH7SvM55GZ3jKpEBKeTiSi%2FQHnItcJVWnuUHe637JQm%2F5DBnc%3D

 

[acehard]

Where is Owens? Did I miss something? Went out for a walk, so probably missed it.

Right behind in the next row

 

[ShadyLady]

This just hit me. It feels like a mock trial, with a hypothetical case.

Assuming these facts, then....

The assumed facts here are the ones she supplied! So they're arguing at what point the laughing stopped.

But there's no evidence anyone was laughing!

It's almost like there's two cases, a case within a case.

If SB perceived JT to be a threat, was she obligated to retreat? If she's the aggressor, does that law apply? Did she hit (poke) him with the bat because she was acting in self-defense or because she was mad (and out of control)?

The State might have been better served to argue against BSS and recognize SB as the aggressor, start to finish.

I wonder what this trial would have looked like with Attorneys 1-7.

Test case for train wreck.

JMO

Exactly. SB is a proven liar so why are they assuming that she was in fear of Jorge?? WHY believe anything she has said. Where is the proof that Jorge made any threats? Videos showed she was the aggressor the whole time. I dont remember any evidence Jorge ever threatened her. SB made all the threats. Every time.
And let's not forget the bruises he had on his back, and other places on his body. Yet, we heard no threats from Jorge. Just pleas and begging.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

This just hit me. It feels like a mock trial, with a hypothetical case.

Assuming these facts, then....

The assumed facts here are the ones she supplied! So they're arguing at what point the laughing stopped.

But there's no evidence anyone was laughing!

It's almost like there's two cases, a case within a case.

If SB perceived JT to be a threat, was she obligated to retreat? If she's the aggressor, does that law apply? Did she hit (poke) him with the bat because she was acting in self-defense or because she was mad (and out of control)?

The State might have been better served to argue against BSS and recognize SB as the aggressor, start to finish.

I wonder what this trial would have looked like with Attorneys 1-7.

Test case for train wreck.

JMO

IMO I believe she either hit / poked the suitcase with him in it to antagonize and goad him. To mock or make fun of him - as in……. see who is in charge now? See who has the upper hand now? How does that feel?

Also I believe a key question is WITH didn’t she let him out of it? It was a game, right SB? When was it supposed to end?

Attempting to blame it on drinking, when evidence is shown of her domineering and condescending nature towards JT will make it difficult to believe or accept the defense position. Maybe even make it impossible to consider?

Lastly….. IMO her actions (and inactions) which resulted in JT’s death were intentional. Every last one of them. She just went too far…… and here is where it resulted. Probably went and sat outside for a smoke break or two….. came back inside and realized what happened. MOO

 

[Megnut]

It feels like all reason took leave when BSS showed up.

If she put a child in a suitcase, zipped it up, claimed it was a game, got angry and thought of all the times the child was naughty so poked him with a bat (why are we still saying 'poke'? That's hard poking to leave bruises like she did), then left the child and went to bed, would there be this confusion?

Because of the videos, was there never really an investigation? Scuff marks on the wall (staircase), stuff marks on the suitcase? Was there ever a real attempt to determine the order of events?

The law is being applied to SB's made up story!!!

Like arguing over what food item someone choked on when the provider made up the choking part!

JMO

 

[Megnut]

I'm glad I don't have to fill out the jury flowchart!

 

[jepop]

Answer is cycle of abuse, which is a real thing IF you establish she was a victim of Battered Spouse. Asking the question would be helping her. Strategy should be to show that she's equally the aggressor, if not the primary, which the State did with all the videos from her past. She's toast IMO MOO

Exactly. And battered, (& emotionally abused,,) spouse syndrome would completely explain why JT didn't leave Sarah Boone. He stayed until she killed him, as happens to so many women victims of domestic violence. Experts in domestic violence understand that asking an abused woman why she doesn't just leave is not useful. I believe police are better trained in these things than they used to be but still a ways to go. Jmo

As you say, the cycle of abuse is real.moo. I think in this case JT also experienced what many abused women used to routinely experience not so long ago; a lack of support from society and ignorance of the police. It was heartening but also upsetting in one of the later body cam videos when JT was cuffed on the bed and being helped into his shoes by responding officers, to see one of them trying to connect with him:
- 'I can't help you if you won,'t say what happened. I think she may have done this before,'. (Paraphrasing).

Like many women caught up in the cycle of abuse my impression was JT hung his head and clammed up out of shame and probably misplaced loyalty.jmo

Those officers in that footage clearly knew him from previous calls and I think it was pretty clear they were beginning to suspect JT was a repeated victim of SB and wanted to try and help him. I did not see JT act aggressively once in any of the LE cuffing videos. Cops followed protocol but they weren't afraid of him. Moo

 

[sasha17]

Because of the videos, was there never really an investigation? Scuff marks on the wall (staircase), stuff marks on the suitcase? Was there ever a real attempt to determine the order of events?

The law is being applied to SB's made up story!!!

Like arguing over what food item someone choked on when the provider made up the choking part!

JMO

SBM. I agree, and I think this really got overlooked. We heard nothing about whether there was any investigation into what could have happened with the stairs and the suitcase. Was the frame of the suitcase broken or scraped that would match falling down the stairs? Were there scrapes on the walls upstairs or on the staircase? The crime scene photo showed a bookshelf at the base of the stairs. Any signs that was moved or bumped? We don't know if any of these things were considered. It seems like they just took Sarah's story of the suitcase already being downstairs as the truth and went forward from there.