MISTRIAL - Sidney Moorer on trial for the kidnapping of Heather Elvis - June 20 & 21,2016 - #1

[yupikgirl]

Who said this? Did I miss it?

One of the officers - can't remember which- said that he went to TK and the "kitchen manager" told him that. Referring to DH I believe.

I wonder if it's true. I wonder if the manager just heard that or got it confused with the Walmart story ...or maybe it was just TM and HE so we won't hear about it at all. So many possibilities LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yupikgirl]

One things that's certain several people testified she had a black eye.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bestill]

I'm sorry but I think TM is an idiot. I think she was trying to fix it for Sid with the fake pregnancy and that is just stupid. Why would she do that for a man that cheats on her? Sick!

 

[Madeleine74]

Yes, regardless of who gave her the black eye, it was one of the M's and it was as a result of her affair.

 

[Madeleine74]

Well, why kill a 20 yr old woman? Why harass a 20 yr old woman with hundreds of messages? TM did lots of stupid things and I'm thankful she left a long trail of them. They wouldn't have known about the video from Walmart until after they were arrested and got attorneys. Then the cooking up of a reason to need a preggers test was created. I bet there's no evidence of TM ever disclosing to the jail upon being arrested and incarcerated that she was or might be pregnant. I bet the day she decided to disclose this is AFTER she learned about that Walmart video.

 

[Madeleine74]

Oh the irony... police never would have been able to identify SM from the grainy gas station video (although they still had a call from a 'payphone' to HE's cell phone). But then SM admitted it! Beautiful. Nicely played, LE. Not only that, but SM *confirmed* it was Heather he was talking to and he also *confirmed* it was Heather calling him at 3:14am. That means Heather was in control of her own phone, all courtesy of the defendant's admissions.

 

[bestill]

Didn't we read something about a Bi-Lo receipt too? Where does that play in? I remember TM trying to create an alibi for that saying she was couponing that night.

 

[bestill]

Oh the irony... police never would have been able to identify SM from the grainy gas station video (although they still had a call from a 'payphone' to HE's cell phone). But then SM admitted it! Beautiful. Nicely played, LE.

Exactly! They thought they were so smart.

 

[ZooSleuth]

Well, why kill a 20 yr old woman? Why harass a 20 yr old woman with hundreds of messages? TM did lots of stupid things and I'm thankful she left a long trail of them. They wouldn't have known about the video from Walmart until after they were arrested and got attorneys. Then the cooking up of a reason to need a preggers test was created. I bet there's no evidence of TM ever disclosing to the jail upon being arrested and incarcerated that she was or might be pregnant. I bet the day she decided to disclose this is AFTER she learned about that Walmart video.

I think you're right. Her lawyer probably revealed the evidence they have against them while locked up and she learned of the Walmart video then.

Your post reminded me of how ridiculous she was being when she was acting like she wasn't getting the care she needed as a pregnant woman yet she was refusing prenatal care & vitamins. That pregnancy couldn't have looked more like a sham.

So it will be interesting if the defense can actually put somebody on the stand and say that the pregnancy test was for TM. Is Truslow allowed to say that in his closing argument if it wasn't brought up by a witness?

 

[Madeleine74]

And if Heather had control of her own phone, then Heather is the one who drove herself to PTL. All the theories of someone somehow kidnapping Heather from her apartment were simply not true. SM (allegedly) drove the black truck to PTL and Heather is the one who (probably) drove her car from her apt to PTL, while her phone's connection/GPS proved the movement of her/her phone/her car to PTL.

 

[Madeleine74]

I think you're right. Her lawyer probably revealed the evidence they have against them while locked up and she learned of the Walmart video then.

Your post reminded me of how ridiculous she was being when she was acting like she wasn't getting the care she needed as a pregnant woman yet she was refusing prenatal care & vitamins. That pregnancy couldn't have looked more like a sham.

Yes. The discovery rules would require the state to release the evidence and files. No doubt heir attorney saw the incriminating report and video and told them. Then the story got cooked up.

 

[geevee]

Well, why kill a 20 yr old woman? Why harass a 20 yr old woman with hundreds of messages? TM did lots of stupid things and I'm thankful she left a long trail of them. They wouldn't have known about the video from Walmart until after they were arrested and got attorneys. Then the cooking up of a reason to need a preggers test was created. I bet there's no evidence of TM ever disclosing to the jail upon being arrested and incarcerated that she was or might be pregnant. I bet the day she decided to disclose this is AFTER she learned about that Walmart video.

Yes, the WalMart video/pregnancy test purchase wasn't disclosed during the evidentiary hearing although discovery had been done and the Moorer's attnys would have known about it, and wasn't it shortly after that hearing that TM requested a bond hearing, based on the "fact" she was pregnant?

 

[bestill]

Now I'm even more curious as to why the video expert had them all riled up.

 

[Madeleine74]

This is why circumstantial evidence is powerful. It's not just one piece...it's like a big puzzle being put together, piece by piece. One might be able to argue away 1 piece of evidence, but when you put ALL the evidence together you can't help but see the image emerge and even if you have a couple pieces missing, you can still determine what the image is. That's my favorite description of a circumstantial case.

 

[Madeleine74]

Now I'm even more curious as to why the video expert had them all riled up.

Because the expert is going to testify that based on all the tests he ran, based on his years of experience....blah, blah, blah, he determined the physical characteristics of the vehicle in the video matched SM's truck in every way he could have determined it to match. Then a cop will probably testify how many black F150 trucks they looked at in the area (maybe even across the state) and the unique characteristics of SM's truck configuration.

 

[Madeleine74]

Yes, the WalMart video/pregnancy test purchase wasn't disclosed during the evidentiary hearing although discovery had been done and the Moorer's attnys would have known about it, and wasn't it shortly after that hearing that TM requested a bond hearing, based on the "fact" she was pregnant?

The take away: the state, in most cases, will hold back evidence, even when they have a bond hearing or a preliminary hearing. They only will disclose enough during a hearing to prove the point they are trying to make...they will never disclose to the public all they have until trial. That has been true in 99.99% of the cases I've followed. So when following a case and people start complaining, "is that ALL they have?" The answer is always, no. There's more but we don't know what it is and likely won't until trial.

 

[Delta Dawn]

The take away: the state, in most cases, will hold back evidence, even when they have a bond hearing or a preliminary hearing. They only will disclose enough during a hearing to prove the point they are trying to make...they will never disclose to the public all they have until trial. That has been true in 99.99% of the cases I've followed. So when following a case and people start complaining, "is that ALL they have?" The answer is always, no. There's more but we don't know what it is and likely won't until trial.

Completely agree. Many years ago when I began trial work, I was told a good trial lawyer was also a good poker player. I think the State has the winning hand.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

What's really stupid is IF Heather was indeed pregnant, I'm sure SM could have talked her into an abortion. He could have used all kinds of reasoning about how this would be for the best, how she was too young, etc, etc. etc. I mean she had feelings for him and probably would have wanted to please him. She had no means to support a baby and she was pretty naive as well. It didn't HAVE to end in a murder. Both of the M's are just sooo stupid.

Then again, when dumb is combined with evil... well this is what happens.

 

[paris_paris]

What's really stupid is IF Heather was indeed pregnant, I'm sure SM could have talked her into an abortion. He could have used all kinds of reasoning about how this would be for the best, how she was too young, etc, etc. etc. I mean she had feelings for him and probably would have wanted to please him. She had no means to support a baby and she was pretty naive as well. It didn't HAVE to end in a murder. Both of the M's are just sooo stupid.

Then again, when dumb is combined with evil... well this is what happens.

Other posts asked how SM would know she might be pregnant... were there calls before that night... maybe that's where the notes on the truck come in.

Wanting Heather to have an abortion? You just opened up another theory in my mind.

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

I think you're right. Her lawyer probably revealed the evidence they have against them while locked up and she learned of the Walmart video then.

Your post reminded me of how ridiculous she was being when she was acting like she wasn't getting the care she needed as a pregnant woman yet she was refusing prenatal care & vitamins. That pregnancy couldn't have looked more like a sham.

So it will be interesting if the defense can actually put somebody on the stand and say that the pregnancy test was for TM. Is Truslow allowed to say that in his closing argument if it wasn't brought up by a witness?

Could TM herself be called?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk