GUILTY IN - Amanda Blackburn, 28, pregnant, murdered, Indianapolis, 10 Nov 2015 #4

  • #141
They're not due back in court until January. Sorry, no link right now. I'll add it later.

I don't expect to see much in the way of a defense. What defense could they possibly offer?

I think Watson eventually will cop a plea to a lesser offense, and Taylor will plead guilty to all counts. If the other three are willing to testify that he confessed to leaning over and firing the mortal wound into Amanda's head, in addition to the physical evidence, I don't see where he has a snowball's chance in hell. Not to mention, sexual assault doesn't seem to be completely off the table. Then there are charges for the rape and other burglaries still pending. Imo, more charges are to come.

Right now, all we have heard about the sequence of events comes from a character who probably wouldn't know the truth if it bit him, and has self-interest to remove himself as far as possible from the murder. There has also been conjecture that ABu was more significantly involved. I'll be interested to hear what the other individuals' description of the chain of events from their perspective. I can't imagine they'll just acquiesce to Gordon/Gordan's account.
 
  • #142
A crazy part of the times we live in,it wasn't that many years ago when this all might have occured without a single phone call.For Amanda's husband and her killer(s) it seems that one way or another everyone's cell phones are interwoven throughout the events of that terrible morning.

The Communication Age has arrived, and from a criminal justice standpoint, it's a blessing. Cell phones, cameras, and electronic communication in general, coupled with advances in DNA technology, provide powerful tools for LE to ensure that guilty suspects are captured and convicted, and innocent folks cleared of crimes they didn't commit. This case is a prime example.
 
  • #143
Right now, all we have heard about the sequence of events comes from a character who probably wouldn't know the truth if it bit him, and has self-interest to remove himself as far as possible from the murder. There has also been conjecture that ABu was more significantly involved. I'll be interested to hear what the other individuals' description of the chain of events from their perspective. I can't imagine they'll just acquiesce to Gordon/Gordan's account.
Of course not. But there's more than DG's account. There's surveillance video from the ATM, surveillance video from the neighborhood, eyewitness accounts, DNA from a stolen sweater, phone records, etc., etc.

I agree that ABu probably was more involved in the burglaries. In fact, I suspect he's the one who hauled away the televisions. That's why I said we might see more burglary charges coming. We've seen nothing which ties him to the murder, though. Any attempt to make that argument is pointless without the facts to back it up. JMO
 
  • #144
If the other three are willing to testify that he confessed to leaning over and firing the mortal wound into Amanda's head...

Respectfully snipped for focus. I am not a lawyer, and I'll gladly be corrected, but after pondering this for a few minutes it occurs to me that the case against LT for murder is inherently weak as it is known to the public right now. According to the informant, he is repeating LT's admission. He was not a witness. The only witness to LT pulling the trigger is dead. That amounts to hearsay, does it not? Hearsay is not evidence. It is enough for probable cause, but any lawyer will have it struck.

"Snitches get stitches." This is what has been bothering me. Who rolled? The oldest of the three (apparently). Is what DG said truthful, or was someone else (ABu) wearing his own clothes? Was DG instructed to repeat the story knowing that LT would skate on murder because there isn't evidence to nail him on pulling the trigger? He is the youngest of the group. Perhaps he is not fully initiated, or just more dispensable than older members. Or given his fewer years has less of a record so he will get less time on the burglary charges that are provable.

Even should multiple witnesses agree that Taylor said he murdered Amanda, it is still hearsay without corroborating evidence that Amanda was alive when the rest of them left, and dying when LT left. That scares me greatly that no one will be held accountable for two innocent's deaths.
 
  • #145
Having been a mom with kids, I disagree that she needed help. I needed no help - whatsoever - taking care of a toddler during breakfast time while I was early pregnant. It's just not that hard, unless you are severely ill or have an extremely difficult or disabled toddler. It's not that hard. What is worse, IMHO, would be to have someone in the house talking on the phone right there where you have to keep the child a little quiet during an hour long conversations.

IMHO, it's a courtesy to handle the call in the car. And if my husband were in the car talking on the phone, I wouldn't run out there and demand to know why. It's most likely I wouldn't even know he had returned.

Totally agree.
 
  • #146
Respectfully snipped for focus. I am not a lawyer, and I'll gladly be corrected, but after pondering this for a few minutes it occurs to me that the case against LT for murder is inherently weak as it is known to the public right now. According to the informant, he is repeating LT's admission. He was not a witness. The only witness to LT pulling the trigger is dead. That amounts to hearsay, does it not? Hearsay is not evidence. It is enough for probable cause, but any lawyer will have it struck.

"Snitches get stitches." This is what has been bothering me. Who rolled? The oldest of the three (apparently). Is what DG said truthful, or was someone else (ABu) wearing his own clothes? Was DG instructed to repeat the story knowing that LT would skate on murder because there isn't evidence to nail him on pulling the trigger? He is the youngest of the group. Perhaps he is not fully initiated, or just more dispensable than older members. Or given his fewer years has less of a record so he will get less time on the burglary charges that are provable.

Even should multiple witnesses agree that Taylor said he murdered Amanda, it is still hearsay without corroborating evidence that Amanda was alive when the rest of them left, and dying when LT left. That scares me greatly that no one will be held accountable for two innocent's deaths.
Amanda was killed with a snub nose revolver. LT owned one. Hopefully it's been recovered. JW is on video at the ATM machine during the time of the murder. Phone records show DG's phone away from the area during the homicide (when the neighbor heard gunshots). LT's phone places him at the scene. Surveillance video and eyewitnesses place him leaving the scene. And that doesn't account for any DNA or other physical evidence from the crime scene which hasn't been released. If the confession is admitted, it will be the cherry on top of a heaping serving of other evidence. JMO
 
  • #147
Amanda was killed with a snub nose revolver. LT owned one.

It just occurred to me... in the PC it was ABull's gf that told LE that gun under HER bed, belonged to Taylor. Did it really? Considering her and ABull lived there together, how do we know that isn't his gun, and not Taylor's at all? Probably not important, but it strikes me as curious how fast these folks give each other up.

You know, because... family. :thinking:
 
  • #148
Amanda was killed with a snub nose revolver. LT owned one. Hopefully it's been recovered. JW is on video at the ATM machine during the time of the murder. Phone records show DG's phone away from the area during the homicide (when the neighbor heard gunshots). LT's phone places him at the scene. Surveillance video and eyewitnesses place him leaving the scene. And that doesn't account for any DNA or other physical evidence from the crime scene which hasn't been released. If the confession is admitted, it will be the cherry on top of a heaping serving of other evidence. JMO

I hope LE has more exact timing than the neighbor's guesstimate on the timing of the gunshots, to place only LT there as the shooter. This is just screaming 'reasonable doubt' to me. I dearly hope that I am wrong on this and you are right, Bessie.
 
  • #149
It just occurred to me... in the PC it was ABull's gf that told LE that gun under HER bed, belonged to Taylor. Did it really? Considering her and ABull lived there together, how do we know that isn't his gun, and not Taylor's at all? Probably not important, but it strikes me as curious how fast these folks give each other up.

You know, because... family. :thinking:
Amanda was killed with a revolver. The gun under the bed was not a revolver.

LT is shown in a picture taken in September lying in a bed with a snub nose revolver next to him. In the affidavit, ABu states LT had a .38 revolver when he left ABu's apartment that morning.
 
  • #150
I hope LE has more exact timing than the neighbor's guesstimate on the timing of the gunshots, to place only LT there as the shooter. This is just screaming 'reasonable doubt' to me. I dearly hope that I am wrong on this and you are right, Bessie.
More key evidence will come from inside the home and poor Amanda's body.
 
  • #151
Amanda was killed with a revolver. The gun under the bed was not a revolver.

LT is shown in a picture taken in September lying in a bed with a snub nose revolver next to him. In the affidavit, ABu states LT had a .38 revolver when he left ABu's apartment that morning.

I honestly don't doubt it was LT that killed AB. I just think ABull is full of it (and his last name is so appropriate the joke just tells itself, really), and was well aware of everything that went down that morning. It's how fast DG, ABull and DM (the gf) threw LT under the bus I find interesting. It was LT wearing ABull's jacket, the gun under the bed was LT's, LT had a gun with him when they all left...

I suspect they just stayed at home and had tea, and discussed world politics while those hooligans were out causing such mayhem. :gaah:
 
  • #152
I honestly don't doubt it was LT that killed AB. I just think ABull is full of it (and his last name is so appropriate the joke just tells itself, really), and was well aware of everything that went down that morning. It's how fast DG, ABull and DM (the gf) threw LT under the bus I find interesting. It was LT wearing ABull's jacket, the gun under the bed was LT's, LT had a gun with him when they all left...

I suspect they just stayed at home and had tea, and discussed world politics while those hooligans were out causing such mayhem. :gaah:
I agree, gf, especially, was quick to throw them under the bus. But place yourself in their shoes. I'm not giving them a pass in ANY way, but looking at it from their POV, they might have been feeling like, "we had a nice thing going until that dang fool killed that woman and screwed it all up. We'll make sure his butt goes down before ours, and he'd best keep his mouth shut about us." It goes back to what I keep saying about DG not mentioning the SUV.

ABu was aware of the shooting after the fact when he told the others to go back for LT. So far, I haven't seen anything that shows he knew about it beforehand. In fact, imo, none of them did. The first two shots were a reaction in the midst of a struggle, a rash act on the part of LT. The third one, not so much. JMO based on the evidence known to us at this time.
 
  • #153
Respectfully snipped for focus. I am not a lawyer, and I'll gladly be corrected, but after pondering this for a few minutes it occurs to me that the case against LT for murder is inherently weak as it is known to the public right now. According to the informant, he is repeating LT's admission. He was not a witness. The only witness to LT pulling the trigger is dead. That amounts to hearsay, does it not? Hearsay is not evidence. It is enough for probable cause, but any lawyer will have it struck.

"Snitches get stitches." This is what has been bothering me. Who rolled? The oldest of the three (apparently). Is what DG said truthful, or was someone else (ABu) wearing his own clothes? Was DG instructed to repeat the story knowing that LT would skate on murder because there isn't evidence to nail him on pulling the trigger? He is the youngest of the group. Perhaps he is not fully initiated, or just more dispensable than older members. Or given his fewer years has less of a record so he will get less time on the burglary charges that are provable.

Even should multiple witnesses agree that Taylor said he murdered Amanda, it is still hearsay without corroborating evidence that Amanda was alive when the rest of them left, and dying when LT left. That scares me greatly that no one will be held accountable for two innocent's deaths.

Hearsay is a statement made out of court that is offered in court as evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/hearsay

So, if we were down the road, and the informant repeated what LT stated during his testimony in court, that would be hearsay. However, there are some key exceptions which permit hearsay testimony in court (see the link above). These exceptions may come into play if the case goes to trial.

As known to the public, the case may be "weak," but there's a lot the State has which isn't going to be publicized. Further, it's more of a circumstantial case than hearsay. The other persons are not going to get on the stand and say, "LT said he killed her." Instead, they will be walked through the chain of events, and asked if Amanda was alive when they left. The defense will then have the opportunity to highlight to the jury that they cooperated to get a deal. It's up to the jury to weed through the BS to get to what they believe happened.

Here is a good script for what the jury would hear at trial about direct vs. circumstantial evidence. A murder case most certainly can be won without direct evidence. https://www.nycourts.gov/judges/cji/1-General/CJI2d.Circumstantial_Evidence.pdf

If multiple witnesses get on the stand and say LT murdered Amanda, he's not getting off. Given the speed of this case and how closely LE played it to the vest, I would bet good money they have strong evidence and everyone involved will strongly be held accountable. We have a perception that people "get off" on cases far more than they actually do. :twocents:
 
  • #154
<modsnip>

Lol. Maybe gf quickly throwing them under the bus was done to avoid a future restraining order process It's hard to kick people out these days without out them always trying to come back. So maybe gf felt that the more the police know; Then the quicker the house will be free of violent criminals hanging around. Idk
 
  • #155
Hearsay is a statement made out of court that is offered in court as evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/hearsay

So, if we were down the road, and the informant repeated what LT stated during his testimony in court, that would be hearsay. However, there are some key exceptions which permit hearsay testimony in court (see the link above). These exceptions may come into play if the case goes to trial.

As known to the public, the case may be "weak," but there's a lot the State has which isn't going to be publicized. Further, it's more of a circumstantial case than hearsay. The other persons are not going to get on the stand and say, "LT said he killed her." Instead, they will be walked through the chain of events, and asked if Amanda was alive when they left. The defense will then have the opportunity to highlight to the jury that they cooperated to get a deal. It's up to the jury to weed through the BS to get to what they believe happened.

Here is a good script for what the jury would hear at trial about direct vs. circumstantial evidence. A murder case most certainly can be won without direct evidence. https://www.nycourts.gov/judges/cji/1-General/CJI2d.Circumstantial_Evidence.pdf

If multiple witnesses get on the stand and say LT murdered Amanda, he's not getting off. Given the speed of this case and how closely LE played it to the vest, I would bet good money they have strong evidence and everyone involved will strongly be held accountable. We have a perception that people "get off" on cases far more than they actually do. :twocents:

Thanks, Ana. I started to write a lengthy post on the rules of hearsay and the exceptions, and decided to scrub the whole thing because it sounded too complicated. You've streamlined it beautifully. :thumb:
 
  • #156
Hearsay is a statement made out of court that is offered in court as evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/hearsay

So, if we were down the road, and the informant repeated what LT stated during his testimony in court, that would be hearsay. However, there are some key exceptions which permit hearsay testimony in court (see the link above). These exceptions may come into play if the case goes to trial.

RSBM Your post is very helpful, thank you. I do not understand how DG's, or any other involved party's, testimony that Taylor admitted to shooting Amanda would fall under any of the exceptions, according to the article posted. But it is not my decision to make. I hope LE has a much stronger case than it now appears. I am glad to see that there is more general optimism about this case than I am feeling right now. I want all who are at fault for Amanda's death to be held accountable.
 
  • #157
I don't think the heresay/statements matter all that much in terms of LT murder charge, except to help suggest/support a narrative of how he got there.

But LT killing Amanda will likely be about a jury trusting cell phone data and gun found in LT's possession matching bullets. Maybe some DNA, but is it even needed if you have those two things ? The defense will have to suggest that someone else had LT's gun and phone. If there is any LT DNA in the house, it's over. right ? But even without it, I think the evidence is convincing if those two aspects are positive.
 
  • #158
The thing is, the killer wanted to kill the first woman that day and the others stopped him. They knew he was in a killing mood, they knew he had a gun.
 
  • #159
The thing is, the killer wanted to kill the first woman that day and the others stopped him. They knew he was in a killing mood, they knew he had a gun.

That's the narrative, but it's coming from guys who can get a lesser sentence from that narrative. I'm sure they all know it'll be obvious who did the killing, now it's about how involved they were.
 
  • #160
They're not due back in court until January. Sorry, no link right now. I'll add it later.

I don't expect to see much in the way of a defense. What defense could they possibly offer?

I think Watson eventually will cop a plea to a lesser offense, and Taylor will plead guilty to all counts. If the other three are willing to testify that he confessed to leaning over and firing the mortal wound into Amanda's head, in addition to the physical evidence, I don't see where he has a snowball's chance in hell. Not to mention, sexual assault doesn't seem to be completely off the table. Then there are charges for the rape and other burglaries still pending. Imo, more charges are to come.

What do you, or anyone else, think of this statement during the Tuesday, Nov. 24th hearing:

The court documents state that Taylor “caused termination of a human pregnancy” when police say he shot and killed Blackburn.

The two men gave short “yes” or “no” answers, except when the judge asked about a speedy trial.

“I don’t want that,” Watson remarked.

http://wishtv.com/2015/11/24/dna-ev...ds-help-track-down-blackburn-murder-suspects/
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
129
Guests online
4,954
Total visitors
5,083

Forum statistics

Threads
633,265
Messages
18,638,776
Members
243,460
Latest member
joanjettofarc
Back
Top