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

[arielilane]

Can I call a mistrial? Start this whole thing over.

New counsels, keep the Judge. moo

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Lunch recess.

Maybe everyone can take this opportunity to go back to law school.

JMO

Yes @Megnut …. and how about passing the bar too? I better stop here. As I said up thread, not impressed with any involved in the case. None. None at all.

And as infrequently noted, JT died in that suitcase! In ‘that game’! In that apartment! While someone else, SB went to sleep! Whether drinking, drunk, or not! Why is this so lost in all the procedural flaws IMO. SMH. IANAL. MOO

 

[arielilane]

Yes @Megnut …. and how about passing the bar too? I better stop here. As I said up thread, not impressed with any involved in the case. None. None at all.

And as infrequently noted, JT died in that suitcase! In ‘that game’! In that apartment! While someone else, SB went to sleep! Whether drinking, drunk, or not! Why is this so lost in all the procedural flaws IMO. SMH. IANAL. MOO

Imo, it won't be lost with the jurors, and that is what counts.

 

[SoWhat]

There’s nothing about this case I don’t hate. Nothing.

Sarah Boone filmed herself doing the crime she’s on trial for. That’s it. That’s the ball game. She did what she did and it cannot be denied or undone. There is no justification for what she did. It’s clear that Jorge Torres was helpless. The only violence that matters with respect to the charges against Sarah Boone is the violence that ended with Torres’s death that night. We have no proof that JT harmed her in anyway that night and we have abundant proof that she assaulted him and left him to die a horrible death inside of a suitcase in her apartment.

I deeply dislike the way that DV and alcoholism is handled by all parties in this trial. Unpopular opinion I know but the state is particularly offensive in how they talk about both of those things. The state flips between hinting at SB being the abuser in the relationship and not vice versa to affirming abuse of SB by JT but blaming SB for putting up with it for so long. I don’t understand why state decided yesterday that they were going to try to get the defense witness to agree with them that SB is a narcissist except that narcissistic disorders are essentially shorthand for untreatable and inherent evilness to the laity.

I also don’t understand why state is emphasizing alcoholism so much in their arguments. It seems as though they crafted their argument regarding the alcoholism based off of the police interviews with SB and never adjusted or didn’t want to adjust their strategy when the new defense team firmed their strategy up. I am offended by things the state is suggesting like there’s something wrong with the defense psychologist’s assessment of SB because of SB’s alcoholism. Why did state repeatedly imply yesterday that SB seeking professional help when drunk is proof of SB’s wrongdoing or that she wasn’t traumatized or depressed? I had a loved one who was an alcoholic who committed suicide at age 30. My partner and I are raising one of her children. All of us would have preferred that she sought professional help at any point in this but especially the night that she drank and then killed herself. The prosecution comes off condescending constantly. Whatever any of us does or doesn’t believe about SB specifically is one thing but the state doesn’t seem to have tailored what they were doing yesterday on cross to fit SB, they seemed to think just pointing out she’s an alcoholic and sought professional help for her depression when drunk is wrong and bad. I am also an alcoholic, albeit sober for years now, but maybe that’s clouding my judgement of the trial? I’m getting ticked off at both sides.

I’m still baffled that the prosecution chose to follow up SB’s testimony regarding the abuse she suffered by talking once more about how SB drinks, especially since SB acknowledged that repeatedly already because her defense team pointed it out over and over again while she was on the stand. Everyone is aware that she abuses alcohol. What is the state trying to prove beyond she initially lied about her alcohol consumption? Anyone who knows an alcoholic knows that alcoholics tend to lie about their consumption of it. It’s clear that SB lied about her consumption initially. Had SB continued overtly lying about being drunk at this point then the state’s emphasis on it would make sense. State should have adjusted their strategy when it became clear SB wasn’t denying being drunk anymore. What they needed to do is lay into SB about her claim that JT made her drink alcohol. It’s absurd that SB is making that argument and it matters a great deal that this specifically gets called out. SB gets violent when drunk so much so that she killed her fiancé. SB claims that it’s not her own fault she drinks when it’s clear that she’s an alcoholic and drinks voluntarily. SB denying she has a drinking problem independent of JT is a safety concern because she’s likely to resume drinking when she’s released from prison and we already established she killed someone while drunk. That’s an easy argument to make and we’re probably going to hear it from the judge during sentencing when he throws the entire book at this woman. Prosecution should have pounced on this themselves already though.

All prosecution has to do is stick to what is irrefutable - Sarah Boone murdered Jorge Torres in an especially gruesome and horrific way. He was helpless in that suitcase. Nothing about her behavior that night suggests she feared for her life. Good god, the woman kept saying she feared for her life because Jorge’s family would come after her and that’s obviously not true. Imagine being the detectives in this case and having this woman characterize her deceased fiancés family as a pack of violent thugs who are all racist against white people only to be met with a small, demure, obviously heart broken set of parents who have said that they’re sad for SB too. SB lied about being a victim or a potential victim of JT’s entire family, why should anyone believe her about being in fear for her life at the hands of Jorge? Bring that up!

I don’t know, maybe the rebuttal will be better than the case the prosecution has made as of yesterday. I can only deal with this one in small doses at the end of the day, it’s a distressing case all around and I detest the fact there’s a lack of compassion for what happened to Jorge on display by either side. Alcoholism is a brutal disease but nevertheless Boone’s actions are her own. She recorded herself killing Jorge. She is guilty. Prosecution is making this harder than it should be.

Edit: I am only now catching up on today’s events and holy cow. This is the worst day by far. Has there been a massive migration of all of Florida’s competent attorneys or is Sarah Boone some kind of miasma that poisons the brains of anyone that has to deal with her?

 

[Megnut]

I see what the Defense is trying to show, I just don't understand how they're going about it.

I understand how the State is going about their case (at least I thought I did), but I can't -- for the life of me -- figure out what they're trying to show. Worse, I'm not sure they know.

Long before today.

But for today, they should have had well-formed questions for their witness and a witness, prepared with well-formed answers.

Utter break down in front of and outside the jury.

I THINK the State can save this. At closing.

"You can be sympathetic to SB, who may suffer like a lot of people do with any number of disorders, sympathize with her for being in a toxic relationship, a slew of battery, but you are asked to determine whether she is guilty of the charges before her, guilty of encasing JT in a suitcase and, showing great depraved indifference to his human life, leaving him there, knowing he was injured, struggling to breathe and unable to get out. I ask you to peel away all the noise layers and find her guilty, of murder in the second degree."

JMO

 

[Izzylizzy]

Vinnie's Q & A with members.
Uses video from trial.
Talking about zipper now.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

There’s nothing about this case I don’t hate. Nothing.

Sarah Boone filmed herself doing the crime she’s on trial for. That’s it. That’s the ball game. She did what she did and it cannot be denied or undone. There is no justification for what she did. It’s clear that Jorge Torres was helpless. The only violence that matters with respect to the charges against Sarah Boone is the violence that ended with Torres’s death that night. We have no proof that JT harmed her in anyway that night and we have abundant proof that she assaulted him and left him to die a horrible death inside of a suitcase in her apartment.

I deeply dislike the way that DV and alcoholism is handled by all parties in this trial. Unpopular opinion I know but the state is particularly offensive in how they talk about both of those things. The state flips between hinting at SB being the abuser in the relationship and not vice versa to affirming abuse of SB by JT but blaming SB for putting up with it for so long. I don’t understand why state decided yesterday that they were going to try to get the defense witness to agree with them that SB is a narcissist except that narcissistic disorders are essentially shorthand for untreatable and inherent evilness to the laity.

I also don’t understand why state is emphasizing alcoholism so much in their arguments. It seems as though they crafted their argument regarding the alcoholism based off of the police interviews with SB and never adjusted or didn’t want to adjust their strategy when the new defense team firmed their strategy up. I am offended by things the state is suggesting like there’s something wrong with the defense psychologist’s assessment of SB because of SB’s alcoholism. Why did state repeatedly imply yesterday that SB seeking professional help when drunk is proof of SB’s wrongdoing or that she wasn’t traumatized or depressed? I had a loved one who was an alcoholic who committed suicide at age 30. My partner and I are raising one of her children. All of us would have preferred that she sought professional help at any point in this but especially the night that she drank and then killed herself. The prosecution comes off condescending constantly. Whatever any of us does or doesn’t believe about SB specifically is one thing but the state doesn’t seem to have tailored what they were doing yesterday on cross to fit SB, they seemed to think just pointing out she’s an alcoholic and sought professional help for her depression when drunk is wrong and bad. I am also an alcoholic, albeit sober for years now, but maybe that’s clouding my judgement of the trial? I’m getting ticked off at both sides.

I’m still baffled that the prosecution chose to follow up SB’s testimony regarding the abuse she suffered by talking once more about how SB drinks, especially since SB acknowledged that repeatedly already because her defense team pointed it out over and over again while she was on the stand. Everyone is aware that she abuses alcohol. What is the state trying to prove beyond she initially lied about her alcohol consumption? Anyone who knows an alcoholic knows that alcoholics tend to lie about their consumption of it. It’s clear that SB lied about her consumption initially. Had SB continued overtly lying about being drunk at this point then the state’s emphasis on it would make sense. State should have adjusted their strategy when it became clear SB wasn’t denying being drunk anymore. What they needed to do is lay into SB about her claim that JT made her drink alcohol. It’s absurd that SB is making that argument and it matters a great deal that this specifically gets called out. SB gets violent when drunk so much so that she killed her fiancé. SB claims that it’s not her own fault she drinks when it’s clear that she’s an alcoholic and drinks voluntarily. SB denying she has a drinking problem independent of JT is a safety concern because she’s likely to resume drinking when she’s released from prison and we already established she killed someone while drunk. That’s an easy argument to make and we’re probably going to hear it from the judge during sentencing when he throws the entire book at this woman. Prosecution should have pounced on this themselves already though.

All prosecution has to do is stick to what is irrefutable - Sarah Boone murdered Jorge Torres in an especially gruesome and horrific way. He was helpless in that suitcase. Nothing about her behavior that night suggests she feared for her life. Good god, the woman kept saying she feared for her life because Jorge’s family would come after her and that’s obviously not true. Imagine being the detectives in this case and having this woman characterize her deceased fiancés family as a pack of violent thugs who are all racist against white people only to be met with a small, demure, obviously heart broken set of parents who have said that they’re sad for SB too. SB lied about being a victim or a potential victim of JT’s entire family, why should anyone believe her about being in fear for her life at the hands of Jorge? Bring that up!

I don’t know, maybe the rebuttal will be better than the case the prosecution has made as of yesterday. I can only deal with this one in small doses at the end of the day, it’s a distressing case all around and I detest the fact there’s a lack of compassion for what happened to Jorge on display by either side. Alcoholism is a brutal disease but nevertheless Boone’s actions are her own. She recorded herself killing Jorge. She is guilty. Prosecution is making this harder than it should be.

Thank you @SoWhat for voicing that opinion! I too am not pleased with the efforts in this trial. And with plenty of friends in recovery I am of the same opinions portrayed in your post. A very nice summation that you have given.

No one makes me take a drink or drug. No one makes me drive my car too fast (or too slowly). No one makes me treat another individual in a certain manner or fashion. That is my own decision. Same for being responsible for my actions, good or bad. That is my responsibility and I get the consequences. That is lost in this matter. And to inaccurately portray it is offensive.*

No matter their relationship, it doesn’t seem to have been perhaps a good one or healthy one. But that is not my judgement to say. Basing that only on publicly available information.

And lastly…. as you also nicely state….. the way that alcoholism (or addiction) is being handled and demonstrated or portrayed in this case is IMO offensive and deplorable. Anyone that might struggle with it or recovery could better describe the ups and downs, highs and lows, healthy and unhealthy, and good and bad of both addiction and recovery. Sadly…… a true or accurate description is long missing in this case IMO.

And if……IF….. SB did (or didn’t) seek any help for an addiction, good for her. That should not be used one way or another. It might depend on exactly when that occurred though for other reasons. But what is apparent IMO from the publicly available evidence in this case, is that two individuals that evening, while apparently consuming at least large measures IIRC of wine, played a dangerous ‘game’. A deadly lethal game. And only one survived. And that death of JT was in large part due to the actions (or inactions) of the other partner, SB. And it didn’t seem that any suitable measures were taken by the defendant to aid the constrained and now deceased JT. None to help alleviate or prevent his obvious suffering and demise. MOO

*N.B….. if one wants to see a good film with stark portrayal of addiction and alcoholism there are three IMO: Days of Wine and Roses (Lee Remick, Jack Lemmon, Jack Klugman); Come Back, Little Sheba (Shirley Booth, Burt Lancaster); Clean and Sober (Michael Keaton, Kathy Baker, Morgan Freeman). There are obviously others….. but many contend these are very illuminating and insightful.

 

[SoWhat]

Imo, it won't be lost with the jurors, and that is what counts.

Exactly. At the end of the day the whole crime is on video and the case against Sarah Boone has already been made convincingly by Sarah Boone herself. I will be surprised if the jurors don’t ask to rewatch the videos and the her first interrogation when they go to deliberate. The reason this case is so high profile is because of how extraordinarily clear the proof of guilt is and how extraordinarily unrepentant and pugnacious SB is. IF JT abused her to the extent she claims that doesn’t justify her actions and at best only works as mitigation in terms of sentencing. Given that Sarah Boone, the bear pokingest person on the planet, antagonized the court for the past 4 years and still isn’t taking responsibility for her actions I don’t expect this judge to go easy on her in the least. He has seen her wreak havoc from jail, imagine her capacity to do harm outside of it upon release.

 

[cujenn81]

This is insane.

INSANE! I seriously wanna pull my hair out.

 

[cujenn81]

There’s nothing about this case I don’t hate. Nothing.

Sarah Boone filmed herself doing the crime she’s on trial for. That’s it. That’s the ball game. She did what she did and it cannot be denied or undone. There is no justification for what she did. It’s clear that Jorge Torres was helpless. The only violence that matters with respect to the charges against Sarah Boone is the violence that ended with Torres’s death that night. We have no proof that JT harmed her in anyway that night and we have abundant proof that she assaulted him and left him to die a horrible death inside of a suitcase in her apartment.

I deeply dislike the way that DV and alcoholism is handled by all parties in this trial. Unpopular opinion I know but the state is particularly offensive in how they talk about both of those things. The state flips between hinting at SB being the abuser in the relationship and not vice versa to affirming abuse of SB by JT but blaming SB for putting up with it for so long. I don’t understand why state decided yesterday that they were going to try to get the defense witness to agree with them that SB is a narcissist except that narcissistic disorders are essentially shorthand for untreatable and inherent evilness to the laity.

I also don’t understand why state is emphasizing alcoholism so much in their arguments. It seems as though they crafted their argument regarding the alcoholism based off of the police interviews with SB and never adjusted or didn’t want to adjust their strategy when the new defense team firmed their strategy up. I am offended by things the state is suggesting like there’s something wrong with the defense psychologist’s assessment of SB because of SB’s alcoholism. Why did state repeatedly imply yesterday that SB seeking professional help when drunk is proof of SB’s wrongdoing or that she wasn’t traumatized or depressed? I had a loved one who was an alcoholic who committed suicide at age 30. My partner and I are raising one of her children. All of us would have preferred that she sought professional help at any point in this but especially the night that she drank and then killed herself. The prosecution comes off condescending constantly. Whatever any of us does or doesn’t believe about SB specifically is one thing but the state doesn’t seem to have tailored what they were doing yesterday on cross to fit SB, they seemed to think just pointing out she’s an alcoholic and sought professional help for her depression when drunk is wrong and bad. I am also an alcoholic, albeit sober for years now, but maybe that’s clouding my judgement of the trial? I’m getting ticked off at both sides.

I’m still baffled that the prosecution chose to follow up SB’s testimony regarding the abuse she suffered by talking once more about how SB drinks, especially since SB acknowledged that repeatedly already because her defense team pointed it out over and over again while she was on the stand. Everyone is aware that she abuses alcohol. What is the state trying to prove beyond she initially lied about her alcohol consumption? Anyone who knows an alcoholic knows that alcoholics tend to lie about their consumption of it. It’s clear that SB lied about her consumption initially. Had SB continued overtly lying about being drunk at this point then the state’s emphasis on it would make sense. State should have adjusted their strategy when it became clear SB wasn’t denying being drunk anymore. What they needed to do is lay into SB about her claim that JT made her drink alcohol. It’s absurd that SB is making that argument and it matters a great deal that this specifically gets called out. SB gets violent when drunk so much so that she killed her fiancé. SB claims that it’s not her own fault she drinks when it’s clear that she’s an alcoholic and drinks voluntarily. SB denying she has a drinking problem independent of JT is a safety concern because she’s likely to resume drinking when she’s released from prison and we already established she killed someone while drunk. That’s an easy argument to make and we’re probably going to hear it from the judge during sentencing when he throws the entire book at this woman. Prosecution should have pounced on this themselves already though.

All prosecution has to do is stick to what is irrefutable - Sarah Boone murdered Jorge Torres in an especially gruesome and horrific way. He was helpless in that suitcase. Nothing about her behavior that night suggests she feared for her life. Good god, the woman kept saying she feared for her life because Jorge’s family would come after her and that’s obviously not true. Imagine being the detectives in this case and having this woman characterize her deceased fiancés family as a pack of violent thugs who are all racist against white people only to be met with a small, demure, obviously heart broken set of parents who have said that they’re sad for SB too. SB lied about being a victim or a potential victim of JT’s entire family, why should anyone believe her about being in fear for her life at the hands of Jorge? Bring that up!

I don’t know, maybe the rebuttal will be better than the case the prosecution has made as of yesterday. I can only deal with this one in small doses at the end of the day, it’s a distressing case all around and I detest the fact there’s a lack of compassion for what happened to Jorge on display by either side. Alcoholism is a brutal disease but nevertheless Boone’s actions are her own. She recorded herself killing Jorge. She is guilty. Prosecution is making this harder than it should be.

Edit: I am only now catching up on today’s events and holy cow. This is the worst day by far. Has there been a massive migration of all of Florida’s competent attorneys or is Sarah Boone some kind of miasma that poisons the brains of anyone that has to deal with her?

I think your last sentence sums it all up nicely.

 

[Seattle1]

I'll give ten dollars to anyone who can summarize Owens last objection.

The judge overruled it so... bring in the jury.

Can you please just give the $10 to the HS kids to leave for the day. And please Madam Clerk, don't invite them to shadow Judge at the bench today! It's too distracting when we are at the 11th hour!

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1849480908987842920

 

[SoWhat]

Thank you @SoWhat for voicing that opinion! I too am not pleased with the efforts in this trial. And with plenty of friends in recovery I am of the same opinions portrayed in your post. A very nice summation that you have given.

No one makes me take a drink or drug. No one makes me drive my car too fast (or too slowly). No one makes me treat another individual in a certain manner or fashion. That is my own decision. Same for being responsible for my actions, good or bad. That is my responsibility and I get the consequences. That is lost in this matter. And to inaccurately portray it is offensive.*

No matter their relationship, it doesn’t seem to have been perhaps a good one or healthy one. But that is not my judgement to say. Basing that only on publicly available information.

And lastly…. as you also nicely state….. the way that alcoholism (or addiction) is being handled and demonstrated or portrayed in this case is IMO offensive and deplorable. Anyone that might struggle with it or recovery could better describe the ups and downs, highs and lows, healthy and unhealthy, and good and bad of both addiction and recovery. Sadly…… a true or accurate description is long missing in this case IMO.

And if……IF….. SB did (or didn’t) seek any help for an addiction, good for her. That should not be used one way or another. It might depend on exactly when that occurred though for other reasons. But what is apparent IMO from the publicly available evidence in this case, is that two individuals that evening, while apparently consuming at least large measures IIRC of wine, played a dangerous ‘game’. A deadly lethal game. And only one survived. And that death of JT was in large part due to the actions (or inactions) of the other partner, SB. And it didn’t seem that any suitable measures were taken by the defendant to aid the constrained and now deceased JT. None to help alleviate or prevent his obvious suffering and demise. MOO

*N.B….. if one wants to see a good film with stark portrayal of addiction and alcoholism there are three IMO: Days of Wine and Roses (Lee Remick, Jack Lemmon, Jack Klugman); Come Back, Little Sheba (Shirley Booth, Burt Lancaster); Clean and Sober (Michael Keaton, Kathy Baker, Morgan Freeman). There are obviously others….. but many contend these are very illuminating and insightful.

Yes and thank you for all of this as well!

It’s a fundamental part of AA that we accept all the responsibility for what we’ve done, it is integral to getting and staying sober. Doesn’t matter what happened to us. Nothing justifies going back to the bottle knowing we are powerless against alcohol. We’re still responsible for our actions while drunk. Getting plastered isn’t a healthy coping mechanism. As an adult it’s my responsibility to deal with my mental and emotional states in a healthy way, it’s no one else’s job to manage my behavior and conduct, I’m not a child. Sobriety requires that we finally grow up after years of avoiding doing so.

I’m still in awe that Sarah didn’t react with horror and sorrow when she saw what she actually did to JT. Maybe it’s because I don’t cavort with unrepentant alcoholics but it’s crazy seeing someone who is the same person drunk as they are sober. Maybe that’s why she can’t understand or admit she’s an alcoholic. She’s completely confident about all of her decisions and conduct. A lot of us thought when she dried out she’d be remorseful and throw herself upon the mercy of the court. Wild that she let it get this far knowing that there was a generous off ramp offered to her by the state all the way up to the 11th hour. Eesh.

 

[arielilane]

Court will resume soon... fingers crossed

FOX 35 Orlando Live - Watch Live Newscasts

www.fox35orlando.com

 

[CHEL]

We're back

 

[CHEL]

OMG another Motion

 

[Megnut]

We're back

We're back

We're back at it.

Tennis match.

 

[Megnut]

Whoa, Owen's just called for dismissal of case for prosecutorial misconduct.

DENIED

 

[Megnut]

Owens says he's been ambushed.

After the hard DENIED, the judge is reading Owens' own words back to him from the deposition.

BAM.

 

[Seattle1]

"A Catchall?"

Since when -- sounds like a 'do-over' to me.

IMO, Owens is coming off right there with SB and her child games with house rules.