The Bi-Lo receipt never came up and have been wondering why?
And that was the very definition of kidnapping, per NL. If the jury can seize on that alone, I think they will vote guilty. They know TM has a trial looming, maybe that will dispel the doubt of who was driving the truck. Another jury can convict her when the time comes. Wishful thinking ...But SM is the one who lured her out that night/morning.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Just got caught up and pulled the live feed up. Can someone fill me in on what is going on in the court room right now? Are the jurors watching surveillance video? Tia
And good morning.
My husband hasn't followed the case, last night I gave him a brief list of the evidence , phone calls, truck video etc. His first thought " That is a lot of suspicious activity by Sidney to all just be coincidence. I vote guilty " 5 minutes later he added " but they didn't prove who was driving the truck , he could of went home after the pay phone call and the wife took the truck , I vote not guilty " I replied " but Heather was afraid of the wife, would never ever of met her in broad daylight much less at the landing at that time of night " He replied " but you still don't know who was driving the truck "
13 cell phones?
Huh? :waitasec: You mean the cell phones found at the compound?
Huh? :waitasec: You mean the cell phones found at the compound?
What video do they want to see? The payphone call was too blurry but SM admitted it was him, (which I'm sure he regrets now). The Walmart video is clearly him, unless they're trying to see if TM is in the truck. Just trying to figure what video they want
If I were on the jury, I'd want to see the two videos of the truck going to/from the landing.
What video do they want to see? The payphone call was too blurry but SM admitted it was him, (which I'm sure he regrets now). The Walmart video is clearly him, unless they're trying to see if TM is in the truck. Just trying to figure what video they want
no doubt Bri was a great friend/roommate and wants SM to suffer but I have to admit I felt it strange w emphasis everyone was putting on HE possibly pregnant, then Bri testifying she saw no tampons, etc.....then on cross the starts with "spotting" then ultimately states "yes, she got her period". i think that would be stuck in my mind as a juror as a little deceptive
I am wondering why it was never addressed why a 2nd pregnancy test wasnt revealed. I dont think I know of anyone that is curious enough to take a test, then receive an error response, not take a 2nd test for accurate results. Maybe HE took a 2nd test and told Bri the results but it would now be considered hearsay