GA v Hannah Payne - HP allegedly murdering a man involved in a hit-and-run in 2019 *GUILTY*

[BeachSky]

Me?

lol RSF …
She did it real fast, one after the other
She put them all in her pocket!
She was in damage control mode
IMO

 

[DS2021]

1:09:00 for another civlian eyewitness

WATCH LIVE: Hannah Payne Takes the Stand in Citizen’s Arrest Turned Deadly Trial — Day Four

In 2019, Hannah Payne witnessed a hit-and-run accident. She called 911 to report the crash — but instead of following instructions from dispatchers — she all...

www.youtube.com

 

[arielilane]

So she did lie on the stand during testimony about not having her finger on the trigger. Did she remove the fake nails because the fake nail fell off of the trigger finger, and to remove any DNA? moo

 

[arielilane]

Imo, she incriminated herself during the interrogation video. Doesn't matter what witnesses say. The interrogation video says it all, and I believe the jury will recognize that too. moo

 

[arielilane]

ATLANTA, Ga. (Atlanta News First) - For the first time since her trial started, a jury heard Hannah Payne explain in her own words what happened the day that 62-year-old Kenneth Herring died.

Payne, 25, is accused of tracking down, shooting and killing Herring after he left the scene of a car accident in 2019.

During her testimony on Monday, Payne said she was trying to “be a messenger for police” when she approached Herring’s truck with a 911 operator on the phone, despite dispatchers telling her not to.

RELATED: Jurors hear 911 call from woman accused of shooting, killing man who fled from accident

Hannah Payne takes witness stand in own murder trial, says she ‘feared for her life’

She testified she was going to tell Herring he needed to return to the scene of the original accident.

www.atlantanewsfirst.com

Dec. 11, 2023 at 7:05 PM EST|Updated: 16 hours ago

 

[RickshawFan]

Video this morning
Is she biting off her nails in LE custody ?!!!
WHO does that if innocent ?!!!

Oooh.... I suddenly got what you're talking about. She didn't want any evidence that she had long fingernails. There could have been DNA under them or there was evidence of scratching on herself or the victim.

 

[RickshawFan]

Imo, she incriminated herself during the interrogation video. Doesn't matter what witnesses say. The interrogation video says it all, and I believe the jury will recognize that too. moo

She has an answer for everything, also on the stand, and she can manipulate her answer on the fly without taking a breath. This is what's so scary about her.

Has anyone noticed how she purses her lips often, especially when she was on the stand? It's like being in a constant state of rage.

 

[RickshawFan]

So she did lie on the stand during testimony about not having her finger on the trigger. Did she remove the fake nails because the fake nail fell off of the trigger finger, and to remove any DNA? moo

She wiped the gun down after, too, AFAIK.

 

[RickshawFan]

On the nails...Speculation: I think she scratched herself after the fact to implicate him. She had scratches on her back, yeah? She did those herself to make it like he reached far out of the truck and was wrapped around her body. But his arms actually never went out of the truck, or at least no one saw them go out AFAIK. IMO the bottom window of the truck was too high for him to reach out.

 

[ch_13]

Someone tried to make contact with a juror!

At 3:10:40.

Edit - Don't know what happened, but the Law & Crime stream just disappeared.

 

[AzPistonsGirl]

I also hope for a quick verdict. Among other things here.

KENNETH HERRING is his name. Wish it was in the title of this thread.

 

[DS2021]

I see people saying this should be a manslaughter charge.
If shes convicted of false imprisonment, and deemed to have killed him, wouldnt that be considered felony murder?

 

[DS2021]

I also hope for a quick verdict. Among other things here

Is the jury deliberating yet?

 

[AzPistonsGirl]

no, the jury is not out yet. But when they do get the case, I hope deliberations are quick. (I think we need professional jurists in this country but that's another loooooong discussion to have elsewhere.)

 

[threesevenninefour]

I see people saying this should be a manslaughter charge.
If shes convicted of false imprisonment, and deemed to have killed him, wouldnt that be considered felony murder?

I disagree, because I believe when she decided to follow Mr. Herring after being explicitly told not to and approached his vehicle with her gun drawn she showed malice and intent. I don’t believe this was a crime of “passion” or done in the heat of the moment because it was completely avoidable and there still has been no proof that she was even attacked by Mr. Herring in an attempt to defend himself from her vigilantism.

MOO!

 

[arielilane]

Law&Crime site reported: "I had to cut the stream to handle an issue, will be back up later!"

 

[arielilane]

Video (from 2019) is 6 + minutes. Her best friend didn't know she had a concealed weapon permit.

Family, friends show support for Hannah Payne​

The 21-year-old is charged with following a man who left a hit-and-run scene and murdering him.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

This is the most bizarre strategy I've heard in a situation like this. So you kill a man you had no right to chase, block, and confront with a gun? A man, by the way, who may have been having a medical emergency, and your defense is to literally defend your actions and villianize HIM??? She's a cold-blooded brat murderer. And I'm curious if the racist angle has been explored?

MOO

Looking at the evidence I don't really know how else they could defend her.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Looking at the evidence I don't really know how else they could defend her.

IANAL, but just as a lay person, I think my strategy in a case like this would be unmitigated remorse, admitting the intensity of the situation, of witnessing an accident and fear of driver being drunk and possibly killing someone else, affected her so deeply that she lost control and that if she had it to do over again, she would never ever follow him or get out of her vehicle. She could admit she created this situation and caused his death, apologize and claim her young, underdeveloped brain was momentarily traumatized and scared and she truly didn't know what she was doing, apologize to the court, the family, and everyone involved for her horrific actions.

At least then she'd have a hope the court would take pity on her and sentence her to the minimum.

But her actions, including her testimony, make me hope she gets the toughest sentence imaginable, hopefully to where she never sees the light of day, because she thinks what she did is okay and she would likely do it again.

I mean, you have to wonder. Did she think that if she plays this strategy she may get away with it? There was exactly zero chance she wouldn't be charged/convicted of something with all the evidence against her, so why would she continue to be defiant when she knows she's guilty?

But then, maybe I'm giving the jury too much credit and maybe they'll buy her cockamamie version of events.

MOO.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

IANAL, but just as a lay person, I think my strategy in a case like this would be unmitigated remorse, admitting the intensity of the situation, of witnessing an accident and fear of driver being drunk and possibly killing someone else, affected her so deeply that she lost control and that if she had it to do over again, she would never ever follow him or get out of her vehicle. She could admit she created this situation and caused his death, apologize and claim her young, underdeveloped brain was momentarily traumatized and scared and she truly didn't know what she was doing, apologize to the court, the family, and everyone involved for her horrific actions.

At least then she'd have a hope the court would take pity on her and sentence her to the minimum.

But her actions, including her testimony, make me hope she gets the toughest sentence imaginable, hopefully to where she never sees the light of day, because she thinks what she did is okay and she would likely do it again.

I mean, you have to wonder. Did she think that if she plays this strategy she may get away with it? There was exactly zero chance she wouldn't be charged/convicted of something with all the evidence against her, so why would she continue to be defiant when she knows she's guilty?

But then, maybe I'm giving the jury too much credit and maybe they'll buy her cockamamie version of events.

MOO.

How many jurors are female? I don't think it's that unimaginable that one female juror could feel sympathetic towards her "reasoning". I doubt it will happen, but I can see that being some sort of strategy that a defense would use. IANAL JMO etc