GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #2

[emmalpage81]

It seems an appeal was lodged yesterday (Thursday) http://www.journalnow.com/news/crim...cle_ccec63c4-d9d2-5f23-8beb-277ef07df3bf.html

I find it rather odd that a lawyer would be discussing a case that he is not involved in, regardless of whether he acts for the individual in separate proceedings. My own thought was that the civil lawyer was not aware of the extent of the property taken at the time and the criminal lawyer was trying to protect her image (needs to look good for the jury) by saying she didn't understand that she couldn't take it and was following advice.

 

[kittythehare]

It seems an appeal was lodged yesterday (Thursday) http://www.journalnow.com/news/crim...cle_ccec63c4-d9d2-5f23-8beb-277ef07df3bf.html

I find it rather odd that a lawyer would be discussing a case that he is not involved in, regardless of whether he acts for the individual in separate proceedings. My own thought was that the civil lawyer was not aware of the extent of the property taken at the time and the criminal lawyer was trying to protect her image (needs to look good for the jury) by saying she didn't understand that she couldn't take it and was following advice.

This is causing confusion for weeks now.. we need to clear it up. Wonder if there is a possibility there are two Holtons? Unlikely!
But the big point is as you have said ..its very odd indeed!
I'm not sure where we can go to clarify this either..

 

[emmalpage81]

Just the one as far as I can tell. It describes him as her criminal defence lawyer.

I just had a look at Thompson's bio on his firm website - he knows how to deal with estates - he even works as a public administrator in probates and has done for 10 years. I don't see how anyone with that level of expertise in a field would advise his client to do something like this.

 

[Truthalways]

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.town...-5cad-8e9b-ba7f55f4ccfc/56e1083eafd3c.pdf.pdf

a link to the civil court proceedings document. Fyi

 

[searchinGirl]

http://www.hlntv.com/shows/nancy-gr...tt-ordered-to-return-items-she-took-from-home

this is a link to the Nancy Grace show from Wednesday night 12/9/16 when Rita Cosby was filling in for her...it reports that JC was struck 9 times...Ugh! ...the only thing is that it's not the whole segment that played on air that night... I watched it and the remainder of the segment had both TM and MM defense lawyers talking...Rita was focused on the bat that TM says he brought for Jack that weekend...TM lawyer says he brings a similar bat for Jack every year as he grows up...MM lawyer says that in over 6000 pages in the statement of discovery there is no mention of an interview with either David Lynch or Jack...Rita pointed out that it was in the Sheriff's report but Holton maintains it's not in the prosecution discovery documents and challenged her to prove it...you can see the show on demand with Comcast for another day or two...the interview at the above link is only the half of it and I also got the impression there was more to it even after that cause she didn't say goodbye or thank you...

 

[Hotchips]

In relation to the order made during the week, it states in the order that molly was asked to produce her accounts from april 2011 onwards and her parents credit card accounts. As her bank accounts and jasons from 2011 were obtained as part of the search warrants and have by now exchanged as part of the discovery process, where these not readily available to the estate lawyers on both sides? They would be required for both the estate lawyers and the prosecution and defence so why did nobody at all produce a set of them. I can see why molly wouldnt bother as she would just say they had them at their disposal, let them prove it and go to the expense of doing so..however why did the lynchs estate lawyers not produce them in their evidence esp as they brought the motion? Just a little curious about that...

 

[Frizby]

It seems an appeal was lodged yesterday (Thursday) http://www.journalnow.com/news/crim...cle_ccec63c4-d9d2-5f23-8beb-277ef07df3bf.html

I find it rather odd that a lawyer would be discussing a case that he is not involved in, regardless of whether he acts for the individual in separate proceedings. My own thought was that the civil lawyer was not aware of the extent of the property taken at the time and the criminal lawyer was trying to protect her image (needs to look good for the jury) by saying she didn't understand that she couldn't take it and was following advice.

Interesting bit in that article which the lawyers seem to be making a big deal about when they initially replied to the judgement. They said that they disputed what Shipwash said when he said the property was stored in Tennessee, he was making a point that it was stored in NC. Is this a tactic whereby you discedit one point so it calls into question all the rest. However, the newspaper got hold of the original trial and it clearly states that MM herself testified that the property was moved to Tennessee.

According to the ruling, the property she took from the house was put in a storage unit in Tennessee. Walter Holton, attorney for Molly Corbett in her criminal matters, disputed that, saying that Molly Corbett put the items in storage in Davidson County. According to a portion of the transcript from the Feb. 2 hearing obtained by the Winston-Salem Journal, Molly Corbett testified that the items went directly to storage up in Tennessee.

 

[Hotchips]

Interesting bit in that article which the lawyers seem to be making a big deal about when they initially replied to the judgement. They said that they disputed what Shipwash said when he said the property was stored in Tennessee, he was making a point that it was stored in NC. Is this a tactic whereby you discedit one point so it calls into question all the rest. However, the newspaper got hold of the original trial and it clearly states that MM herself testified that the property was moved to Tennessee.

I can see some discrepanies but not sure if it from her lawyers, the stenographers records or media reports these are coming from.

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/...ns-corbett-breached-court-order-34419824.html

In this article after the hearing in early feb, her lawyers say they are stored in davidson county NC and also the article states she contributed around or less than 5k to the joint account however the latest order it states they are stored in tennessee and she contributed around or less than 10k. Two discrepancies there that need to be cleared up.

 

[Frizby]

In relation to the order made during the week, it states in the order that molly was asked to produce her accounts from april 2011 onwards and her parents credit card accounts. As her bank accounts and jasons from 2011 were obtained as part of the search warrants and have by now exchanged as part of the discovery process, where these not readily available to the estate lawyers on both sides? They would be required for both the estate lawyers and the prosecution and defence so why did nobody at all produce a set of them. I can see why molly wouldnt bother as she would just say they had them at their disposal, let them prove it and go to the expense of doing so..however why did the lynchs estate lawyers not produce them in their evidence esp as they brought the motion? Just a little curious about that...

This order seems to refer to Chase Credit Card statements whereas the Warrants were for accounts held with PNC Bank & Bank of America. Would Chase CC be part of PNC Bank or Bank of America & if they are, are they covered in the warrants?

 

[Frizby]

I can see some discrepanies but not sure if it from her lawyers, the stenographers records or media reports these are coming from.

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/...ns-corbett-breached-court-order-34419824.html

In this article after the hearing in early feb, her lawyers say they are stored in davidson county NC and also the article states she contributed around or less than 5k to the joint account however the latest order it states they are stored in tennessee and she contributed around or less than 10k. Two discrepancies there that need to be cleared up.

Very odd, as the Salem Journal is reporting that they got copies of the initial trial where it states that MM said they were in Tennessee. Seems to be some confusion somewhere.

 

[Hotchips]

This order seems to refer to Chase Credit Card statements whereas the Warrants were for accounts held with PNC Bank & Bank of America. Would Chase CC be part of PNC Bank or Bank of America & if they are, are they covered in the warrants?

My reading of the warrants were that all their accounts whether held solely or jointly were requested. Usually a request would be put out to all financial institutions as how would they know what specific banks to request them from. I know they state these specific banks in the warrants but they would have seen payments going from their joint account to pay this credit card bill so its unlikely this account would have been missed by them.

 

[Frizby]

My reading of the warrants were that all their accounts whether held solely or jointly were requested. Usually a request would be put out to all financial institutions as how would they know what specific banks to request them from. I know they state these specific banks in the warrants but they would have seen payments going from their joint account to pay this credit card bill so its unlikely this account would have been missed by them.

Yeah, they may have spotted it but I have not seen a Warrant for statement for a Chase Credit Card, have you seen one?

 

[Hotchips]

Yeah, they may have spotted it but I have not seen a Warrant for statement for a Chase Credit Card, have you seen one?

No i havent. I just assumed they would have requested these statements when they obtained the search warrants but clearly the police didnt but would have sought further info on them when they would have seen the bills being paid from their joint account. I assumed wrong clearly. I would have thought it would have been useful to them in relation to gathering evidence as to motive in relation to her spending habits. A 12k balance is rather large esp when it would appear they had the means to pay it off. It seems she may have bought a honda pilot on the card, wonder was this before or after his death.. still though the few discrepancies that have appeared in the reporting gives me a niggle of doubt as to the the true picture of what is going on here. A clever game plan by mollys lawyers perhaps to distort things...

 

[Electric Sheep]

No i havent. I just assumed they would have requested these statements when they obtained the search warrants but clearly the police didnt but would have sought further info on them when they would have seen the bills being paid from their joint account. I assumed wrong clearly. I would have thought it would have been useful to them in relation to gathering evidence as to motive in relation to her spending habits. A 12k balance is rather large esp when it would appear they had the means to pay it off. It seems she may have bought a honda pilot on the card, wonder was this before or after his death.. still though the few discrepancies that have appeared in the reporting gives me a niggle of doubt as to the the true picture of what is going on here. A clever game plan by mollys lawyers perhaps to distort things...

The balance means nothing really. I put absolutely everything each month on my credit card to get the cash back award. It would not be unusual for my monthly bill to be 5 figures, but I pay it off each month. The pattern of purchases and payment may be relevant in this case, but the balance almost certainly is not.

 

[Frizby]

No i havent. I just assumed they would have requested these statements when they obtained the search warrants but clearly the police didnt but would have sought further info on them when they would have seen the bills being paid from their joint account. I assumed wrong clearly. I would have thought it would have been useful to them in relation to gathering evidence as to motive in relation to her spending habits. A 12k balance is rather large esp when it would appear they had the means to pay it off. It seems she may have bought a honda pilot on the card, wonder was this before or after his death.. still though the few discrepancies that have appeared in the reporting gives me a niggle of doubt as to the the true picture of what is going on here. A clever game plan by mollys lawyers perhaps to distort things...

Don't know why the Chase Credit Card statements were not requested, I suspect however that they did not view them as primary for the initial investigation into murder. But also don't understand whey she did not produce them when asked for the trial about property ownership. She was asked for balances and backup but produced neither so the judge could only go on what was to hand. Even if they had the statements, they would not have the backup for items which was requested this time. The ownership was on herself to prove her case or disprove the Petitioner, whichever the case may be.

As to where the property was held, the article which you did link does state Davidson Country however this seems to be a reference to comment by the Lawyer and the article from the Salem Journal states they got copies of the initial trial where MM herself testified that the property was taken to Tennessee. Maybe it was taken to Tennessee and then moved back to NC. It is all a bit odd but I don't see where the property being stored as an actual issue, the main issue as I see it was that it was moved when the initial order stated that it was not to be.

Still cannot believe that a Lawyer would advise her to move it as is their current defence. Surely the lawyer would have know what was stated on the original order. Her defence in February was that she actually owned the property from what I read from it. Shame we do not have a copy of the trial documents that the Salem Journal seem to have got.

 

[Hotchips]

The balance means nothing really. I put absolutely everything each month on my credit card to get the cash back award. It would not be unusual for my monthly bill to be 5 figures, but I pay it off each month. The pattern of purchases and payment may be relevant in this case, but the balance almost certainly is not.

Yes thats true re the balance, on a second look if she purchased a car on it, that would bump up the balance. The anomoly i find here is not the balance per se but the fact that records for this account where not sought at the outset and if discovered later on, why not seek them. If they had been sought and exchanged through discovery, the corbett estate and criminal lawyers would have had them for evidence leaving no room for her to twist or lie about who paid for what or leave room for grounds to appeal. Molly may have felt they could seek access to them so maybe thats why she possibly didnt bother producing them herself , Division of marital assets is always tricky even more so when only person brought money into the household unfortunately.

 

[Hotchips]

Don't know why the Chase Credit Card statements were not requested, I suspect however that they did not view them as primary for the initial investigation into murder. But also don't understand whey she did not produce them when asked for the trial about property ownership. She was asked for balances and backup but produced neither so the judge could only go on what was to hand. Even if they had the statements, they would not have the backup for items which was requested this time. The ownership was on herself to prove her case or disprove the Petitioner, whichever the case may be.

As to where the property was held, the article which you did link does state Davidson Country however this seems to be a reference to comment by the Lawyer and the article from the Salem Journal states they got copies of the initial trial where MM herself testified that the property was taken to Tennessee. Maybe it was taken to Tennessee and then moved back to NC. It is all a bit odd but I don't see where the property being stored as an actual issue, the main issue as I see it was that it was moved when the initial order stated that it was not to be.

Still cannot believe that a Lawyer would advise her to move it as is their current defence. Surely the lawyer would have know what was stated on the original order. Her defence in February was that she actually owned the property from what I read from it. Shame we do not have a copy of the trial documents that the Salem Journal seem to have got.

Yes it would be great to see the transcripts. While some media seem to have got access to them for both the original custody hearing and indeed this latest chapter, they have only quoted from them. Lots more evidence and testimony contained in them that arent being released. The media must have got them under condition they arent released in their entirety.

 

[stephanddoody]

I'm not sure if Mr Shipwash would have that information at hand . The civil suit is not associated with the criminal proceedings at all. He would not have that information available that is why he requested it that is why there are 2 different lawyers that is why she is not in jail, if they went hand in hand she would be jail because there is no doubt she is in breach of a court order . The civil and criminal cases are both separate matters and information isn't shared it is available only on request or maybe not at all . That Molly refused to comply is another example of her total lack of respect for the court . Her lawyers are basically saying she is doing the estate a favour by removing the property? Does anyone here think her actions are justified? Regardless of balance on the credit card Molly is in breach of a court order . On the 8th of August Molly agreed she wouldn't remove any tanagible property from the house. Favour or not she has broken the law

 

[stephanddoody]

Sorry the date is the 17th of September not the 8th of August

 

[Frizby]

I'm not sure if Mr Shipwash would have that information at hand . The civil suit is not associated with the criminal proceedings at all. He would not have that information available that is why he requested it that is why there are 2 different lawyers that is why she is not in jail, if they went hand in hand she would be jail because there is no doubt she is in breach of a court order . The civil and criminal cases are both separate matters and information isn't shared it is available only on request or maybe not at all . That Molly refused to comply is another example of her total lack of respect for the court . Her lawyers are basically saying she is doing the estate a favour by removing the property? Does anyone here think her actions are justified? Regardless of balance on the credit card Molly is in breach of a court order . On the 8th of August Molly agreed she wouldn't remove any tanagible property from the house. Favour or not she has broken the law

Sorry the date is the 17th of September not the 8th of August

That makes sense and anyway the information that she was required to produce was really proof of purchase, by who & what account or CC, back up to her claim. She decided to dismiss the request of the court and now they have ruled against her she comes up with another excuse saying that she was only minding the stuff & keeping it safe. The new excuse it totally opposite to her original claim and even if there was any cross over, the original order was still breached. I do not think her actions are justified in the slightest, and that is for the action relating to the property & dismissing the requests of the court. I don't get why a lawyer would make the suggestion that her counsel advised her to do this, it is not as if she took the odd thing, she cleared out the house.