GUILTY HI - Carly Joann 'Charli' Scott, 27, pregnant, Makawao, 9 Feb 2014 - #7

[heartgoesout]

With having said that, I can see a juror not feeling like those questions have been answered. (I'm trying to make sense of this all and typing it out out loud)
Who. We don't really know.
What. Was there a murder?
When. Based on confusing maggot testimony, and memory, we're not really sure.
Where. We don't really know.
Why. Potentially because he didn't want a child and this is age old. Strongest point.
How. We don't really know.

 

[Mamamerced]

Playing off Loio's post. If you had one doubt of guilt in this case what would it be?

For me I think I have answered most of my own questions of who, what, when, where, why and how, if even simply enough beyond a reasonable doubt for a guilty verdict.

Who. Steven Capobianco. He is the only one with evidence of lies surrounding Charli's disappearance.
What. Murdered Charli and Joshua.
When. In the late hours of February 9th 2014. Evidence puts him there.
Where. Either in her vehicle or in the jungle of Paraquats.
Why. He did not want a child nor Charli ruining his perceived life.
How. I don't know. This is the part my one doubt would come in. This includes the timeline and how he managed to do this horrendous crime with a serrated knife only.

The serrated knife is only in relation to the defleshing of the jawbone, not the stabbing.

 

[heartgoesout]

The serrated knife is only in relation to the defleshing of the jawbone, not the stabbing.

yes, you're right.
And there was never an explanation for another weapon or if that other weapon that caused the holes in the clothing could have also explained tiny bone fragments.
I need to stop. I don't want to be negative and I'm talking myself into more questions we will never get answers to and I'll be back to square one.

 

[DeDee]

I think the 3 hold out came from the Dalia Dippolito Trial is I am not mistaken. Which it ended in a mistrial.

I do believe you are correct. My apologies are extended for any confusion. There is a fire truck pumping fluids into my head. I just know it! However, the antibiotics are finally working to clear that up. I watched Ashley Banfield last night as she spoke of Dalia (9 hour jury deliberation) and JonBenet's cases.

I shall not give up on this jury. When a judge requests a panel of jurors to continue deliberations, it should put a fair amount of pressure on the jurors who are still on the fence.

The jury does hold a tremendous burden. It is their job though no matter what time of the year it is.



http://mauitvnews.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/charli.jpg

 

[puakenikeni]

Pua, you asked if any of the jurors seemed likely to be pro-defense and in my opinion only, I think Tom Selleck's counterpart, right smack in the center the action is trouble. Forgive me for judging a book by it's cover because he's a good looking guy and I don't know him personally but he had the body language of an intelligent and well read individual. I always felt he would take up sides with the defense.

I wrongly judge people's character by their shoes and this guy wore tidy sneakers and loafers.

thanks, Loio!
Those of us who never went to court have not seen the jury. I don't even know the gender distribution, age spread, anything.

Its super helpful to hear comments from you or others who attended making them less of a mystery.
Did anyone hear attend the voir dire and hear the Q&A or see who got challenged and dismissed?

 

[puakenikeni]

10:56 then. Whatever. Let's not quibble over 10 min.

My point was that the phone pinged close to 11 and us Websleuthers were trying to make sense of the timeline following Jennifer Taylor's testimony that she saw him in Hana between 9:30 p.m. and 11:30 and Taylor Farner's testimony that she saw him between midnight and 2 AM. And someone can refresh my memory about when those 2 witnesses smelled smoke. Check the Timeline and Media Links thread for the estimated travel times and you can see why the jury would have the *same* challenges with reconciling the timeline.

Honestly I wasn't quibbling with you, Kapua, and I never would over 10 minutes.

I just saw your post say that Charli's phone was last pinging at 9:49, which is an hour or so earlier, and I figured a wire had crossed with some other phone data in your head, possibly SC's cell info. I thought you might want to catch that you wrote 9:49 instead of 11 as you said above. I wasn't picking at you.

 

[DeDee]

With having said that, I can see a juror not feeling like those questions have been answered. (I'm trying to make sense of this all and typing it out out loud)
Who. We don't really know.
What. Was there a murder?
When. Based on confusing maggot testimony, and memory, we're not really sure.
Where. We don't really know.
Why. Potentially because he didn't want a child and this is age old. Strongest point.
How. We don't really know.

Who? SC had motive, means and opportunity. A normal functioning human does not understand the actions of a sociopath like SC. Not all Sociopaths are killers; however, they are very keen on mimicking emotions that is observed from others. Sociopaths know what you are thinking and planning before you do it. They have no fear or remorse. I've seen no grief from SC.

What? CS was murdered. She did not cut her own head off as her vehicle burst into flames. I think she was murdered inside the vehicle and that's why he burned it.

When? By his own admission, SC was the last known person to see Charli.

Where? CSs jaw was miraculously found in the woods. Must we have an entire body to prove murder?

Carly “Charli” Scott, who is five months pregnant, went missing on the Hawaiian island on Feb. 9, and her clothes and blanket were found days after her disappearance. Police searched the area again on Tuesday, finding her bra (which had been slashed), duct tape, a human tooth and a bone, Hawaii News Now reports.
https://ihavevanished.com/tag/forensic-tests/

Why? SC wanted to remain childfree. He had over 3 months to plan these crimes.

How? There are serrations on the jawbone that tells the story. The slashed bra tells me that SC tortured CS while alive.

I am so very sorry that her family and loved ones have to deal with this painful loss forever. Surely he will be known for the rest of his life as Charli and Joshua's killer.

 

[Kapua]

Playing off Loio's post. If you had one doubt of guilt in this case what would it be?

For me I think I have answered most of my own questions of who, what, when, where, why and how, if even simply enough beyond a reasonable doubt for a guilty verdict.

Who. Steven Capobianco. He is the only one with evidence of lies surrounding Charli's disappearance.
What. Murdered Charli and Joshua.
When. In the late hours of February 9th 2014. Evidence puts him there.
Where. Either in her vehicle or in the jungle of Paraquats.
Why. He did not want a child nor Charli ruining his perceived life.
How. I don't know. This is the part my one doubt would come in. This includes the timeline and how he managed to do this horrendous crime with a serrated knife only.

I don't know, HGO. To me, if you have a suspect with a motive, and that suspect has lied to the police, his friends, his girlfriend, and his co-workers, he's in the center of your radar screen. If you find out that the murder victim was pregnant and several witnesses testified that he a) "hated kids" b) thought the baby would ruin his future with the new girlfriend and c) went to Planned Parenthood with the victim to make sure that she "took care of it", you'd be more than wondering if he "took care of it". If you then find out that he was in the same dark, desolate, remote place as the victim on the same date and close to the same time as her last phone ping, you'd pretty much know that you had your perpetrator. And if you found bloody jeans with DNA on the waistband that could not be ruled out as belonging to that perpetrator, you'd be pretty confident of a conviction. Oh, and let's not forget that the victim was not alone that night, she was with her pit-bull mix, Nala. As I have said a thousand times, no serial killer is going after a woman who has a large dog with her. But SC knew the dog.

I simply cannot force my brain to think any other way.

The evidence is there.

SC asked Ginseng Mileur how a person could get away with a murder. That testimony still sends chills down my spine. I don't get how anyone could listen 5 months of testimony that began like that and say, "Hmmm, I just don't know."

 

[Mamamerced]

http://mauiwatch.com/2016/12/poll-capobianco-murder-trial-verdict/

 

[heartgoesout]

"I don't get how anyone could listen 5 months of testimony that began like that and say, "Hmmm, I just don't know."

But the jury is Kapua.

I don't get it either. That's why I'm trying to see it from their point of view. Asking questions to try to understand.
Same as Casey Anthony. It is so blatantly obvious. So what are they hung up on??

 

[Mamamerced]

SC asked Ginseng Mileur how a person could get away with a murder. That testimony still sends chills down my spine. I don't get how anyone could listen 5 months of testimony that began like that and say, "Hmmm, I just don't know."

I (probably the WS "we") share your disbelief and outrage, Kapua. Our mortally wounded justice system rewards with a notch on a lawyer's belt to win a case, especially a high profileone,
at any cost. It should be about justice, not gamesmanship, but it isn't.

 

[Kapua]

"I don't get how anyone could listen 5 months of testimony that began like that and say, "Hmmm, I just don't know."

But the jury is Kapua.

I don't get it either. That's why I'm trying to see it from their point of view. Asking questions to try to understand.
Same as Casey Anthony. It is so blatantly obvious. So what are they hung up on??

Well, again, I have to agree with Loio, because I also struggled to reconcile the timeline at one point.

 

[PeterTosh]

The struggle I believe is some are focusing to much on the trial and not whether or not he did it. I dont think anybody could have doubt he did it. They need to focus on the simple. Did he or didnt he. Not the complications of the case.

 

[MakaniKitty]

I (probably the WS "we") share your disbelief and outrage, Kapua. Our mortally wounded justice system rewards with a notch on a lawyer's belt to win a case, especially a high profileone,
at any cost. It should be about justice, not gamesmanship, but it isn't.

Absolutely true, Mama. I personally do not know how one could sleep at night after spending all day helping a murderer go unpunished. But I know that greed and ambition are great motivators, and many people will abandon their moral compass when they see a flash of green or an opportunity to get ahead, whatever the cost; truth and justice can't compete with money and prestige.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[EstrellaEspectral]

So as far as the arson charge, it is possible he didn't actually do that part. There are burnt up cars all over this island. He could have just ditched the car. Someone else could have stripped and torched it or he could have stripped and torched it to cover up his crime. Either way I'm not as concerned about the arson charge as I am with the murder charge.

I hate that I'm even typing this, but I heard one serial killer say in a documentary that it takes about 3 minutes to strangle someone. Of course, we don't know if that is how Charli died, but it doesn't take long to kill. The dismemberment is a whole other situation. Did someone mention he had a wood chipper? Was said wood chipper recovered? I thought I remembered reading that he had one. I hate to even mention it because it's so horrific, but the whole ordeal is horrific.

Two questions I have for you guys:

1) Did we confirm that the jury vote was 3:9? I thought I read something about three jurors.
2) Was there any information on whether the jurors would continue to deliberate until they get the transcripts requested?

 

[Kapua]

So as far as the arson charge, it is possible he didn't actually do that part. There are burnt up cars all over this island. He could have just ditched the car. Someone else could have stripped and torched it or he could have stripped and torched it to cover up his crime. Either way I'm not as concerned about the arson charge as I am with the murder charge.

I hate that I'm even typing this, but I heard one serial killer say in a documentary that it takes about 3 minutes to strangle someone. Of course, we don't know if that is how Charli died, but it doesn't take long to kill. The dismemberment is a whole other situation. Did someone mention he had a wood chipper? Was said wood chipper recovered? I thought I remembered reading that he had one. I hate to even mention it because it's so horrific, but the whole ordeal is horrific.

Two questions I have for you guys:

1) Did we confirm that the jury vote was 3:9? I thought I read something about three jurors.
2) Was there any information on whether the jurors would continue to deliberate until they get the transcripts requested?

What makes me feel as though he did the arson is the pattern of the pour on the inside of the vehicle - as though the person who set the fire did so to eliminate evidence. But I thought for a long time that he'd ditched it.

To answer your questions

1. No
2. Yes, they are continuing to deliberate:
http://mauinow.com/2016/12/14/capobianco-trial-jury-reconvenes/
http://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2016/12/jury-were-divided/

 

[EstrellaEspectral]

What makes me feel as though he did the arson is the pattern of the pour on the inside of the vehicle - as though the person who set the fire did so to eliminate evidence. But I thought for a long time that he'd ditched it.

To answer your questions

1. No
2. Yes, they are continuing to deliberate:
http://mauinow.com/2016/12/14/capobianco-trial-jury-reconvenes/
http://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2016/12/jury-were-divided/

Ah! Ok. I missed the part about it being on the inside. That makes sense. So much evidence to keep up with!

Thanks for answering my questions!

I hope it's only one juror in question and they change their mind quickly so the Scott's can have a little bit of peace.

 

[Mamamerced]

So as far as the arson charge, it is possible he didn't actually do that part. There are burnt up cars all over this island. He could have just ditched the car. Someone else could have stripped and torched it or he could have stripped and torched it to cover up his crime. Either way I'm not as concerned about the arson charge as I am with the murder charge.

I hate that I'm even typing this, but I heard one serial killer say in a documentary that it takes about 3 minutes to strangle someone. Of course, we don't know if that is how Charli died, but it doesn't take long to kill. The dismemberment is a whole other situation. Did someone mention he had a wood chipper? Was said wood chipper recovered? I thought I remembered reading that he had one. I hate to even mention it because it's so horrific, but the whole ordeal is horrific.

Two questions I have for you guys:

1) Did we confirm that the jury vote was 3:9? I thought I read something about three jurors.
2) Was there any information on whether the jurors would continue to deliberate until they get the transcripts requested?

I never read any MSM about a 3 juror split, but have read it here. I think the 3 is reference to the 3 votes taken by the jury.
Yes, the jury is continuing to deliberate while waiting for the transcripts.

 

[Kapua]

I never read any MSM about a 3 juror split, but have read it here. I think the 3 is reference to the 3 votes taken by the jury.
Yes, the jury is continuing to deliberate while waiting for the transcripts.

A poster a page or three back said that s/he confused this case with another one that resulted in a mistrial and that's where the talk of the 3 holdout jurors originated. I have a meeting in a few, but will see if I can find that post and clarify.

Found it. Ref. post # 392 on page 27 of this thread.

 

[Kapua]

Kapua, was the muddied green cell phone case that was found in Stevens truck ever said out loud in court that it was hers? I don't think it was. And if it was hers and not said, why not? Surely someone could testify that it was her case, even have a picture or a receipt of it.

No, HGO, not as far as I know. (This was during the part of the trial that was not filmed nor broadcast.) The case was mentioned, and we heard nothing further about it.