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

[stephanddoody]

Hi everyone. First time poster here on this topic. After reading much of the thread I get the impression that there is a general feeling that this is clear cut, I.e. Overkill based on him moving to Ireland with the kids and she freaking out and her Dad intervened. But there are a lot of things that don't add up for me. Her Irish in-laws were super friendly with her up until August. They posted lovely messages on FB, Jason's twin had spent a few weeks visiting the family in NC and when he returned home he posted a heap of holiday snaps on FB thanking Molly for being such a great hostess. So if they thought she was a manic alcoholic who mistreated the boy in particular they certainly kept up a cosy relationship with her. If I knew my brother was married to someone as unstable as they are now claiming she was I would have tried help him leave her and not acted like her best friend. Him moving money is a common thing, it's called tax evasion! Most ex-pats living in the US move large sums of money for this reason. Plus I read a post by one of his work colleagues in October speaking about converting his office into a memorial room and that it was on the day he was due to give a work appraisal....so he still had scheduled work planned for October 2015 making the theory he was moving back to Ireland in August shaky, he hadn't enrolled the kids into any Irish schools, hadn't handed in his notice at work, hadn't applied officially for any other jobs....researching work opportunities and actually deciding to pack up and go are two different things. There is no doubt it wasn't a happy marriage but that is not motive enough for murder. The real clue for me is the autopsy.....the finger injuries....if you were trying to kill someone why strike their fingers? The hand injuries were to the back of his hands, defence injuries are usually to the palm of the hands. Repeatedly striking the fingers implies to me someone trying to get him to release his grip on something....the middle finger had a number of bruises, if someone was choking me I'd pull at his fingers to get the hand to release....with my free hand I'd pick up whatever was on a bed side locker and strike him on the face ( fracture nose). Blood was also found under his nails and toenails which happens when you get your fingers caught in a door, so someone was hitting those fingers pretty hard. Most of the torso injuries are abrasions (scratches) which would match someone being pinned down scratching him to get him off. He was 160 lbs heavier than her. Plus autopsy removed pulled hair, whose hair was it? Either he pulled out his own hair ( highly unlikely) or it was hers? If TM came into the room, saw her pinned to the bed with naked JC choking her, he hits him on the hands, hits the fingers, hits the legs, this does not get the man off her, then strikes twice at close range to the head....could a man 25 years younger, 100lbs lighter been able to move him without such force? I don't know. I'm playing devils advocate here as most of the comments thus far haven't mentioned the very strange hand/finger injuries. Why didn't he fight back? If your life is in danger the body kicks into fight or flight mode; he did neither. Is that because he was choking her? A San Diego study of 600 strangulation victims showed 50% showed no visible signs of injury. The levels of drug in his system would not have rendered a man of his size unconscious. That drug however can be dangerous when mixed even with low levels of alcohol, clinical trials showing patients reporting mood swings and erratic behaviour including inexplicable rages. And then the kids testimony, defence are particularly keen on getting the Children's Services reports on what the children had to say. Perhaps they witnessed something earlier in the day, maybe they mentioned pervious rows that were had. In one of Mollys posts she references New Years Eve two years ago where she says she 'tries not to remember the bad things of that night'...whatever that means. I'm swaying more towards the involuntary manslaughter charge, a lot of the motive 'evidence' is circumstantial statements given by the Irish inlaws in a custody battle, there have been no impartial witnesses so far that have backed their claims ( teachers, neighbours etc). Maybe she was a lot of things, but murderer? And the Dad taking the rap? I'm not yet convinced. We have heard a very one sided version from the DA and have yet to hear the defences claims. I think they will be pretty explosive. So any thoughts on the pulled hair and finger/hand injuries id be interested in hearing them. The victim of course did not deserve to loose his life and don't mean to sound callous or insensitive. Just trying to flip this story to the other side and see if any of their claims do stand up especially in the autopsy report.

i don't see your post as being very victim friendly but that is your decision . Clearly you of the belief that this isn't murder I don't think it was premeditated. Can I I ask why you think the sheriffs office the DA and the grand jury would charge 2 persons with a crime if they didn't feel they have sufficient evidence to convict Can I ask where did you get your information from regarding Jason not moving back to Ireland . I think your so called evidence is being based on the say so of 2 people trying to get a away with a murder charge . I saw the marks on the fingers it's the left hand mostly although on pictures I have seen he uses his right hand from what I can gather was he right or left handed do we know? I don't think most defence wounds would be to the palm of the hand . Why would you put your palms facing to the front to defend your face its not a natural reaction at all I am not especially close to my brothers wife I put up with her because he is her choice not mine sometimes I think she is a bit ott not in an abusive way with regards chores etc but again I really don't get involved . Generally people don't get involved in marriages even if they have reservations . regards the money I don't know if he moved money before if he did you may have a point at the point of his death as far as I am aware there was no money moved it was discussed with a former boss from the plant he worked for in Ireland he flew to see him before he was killed so I'm sure during the trial he will shed some light as to what was discussed unless of course you don't believe he will tell the truth either in a court of law .its very easy register a child in school in Ireland before the start of term our term starts in September again the notice for work I don't know how you have evidence he didn't do so and what you are basing this on. . The pulled hair I have no idea found this strange also . But you say jc was choking her so hard tom had to keep hitting and hitting But Jason refused to let go was he pulling her hair at the same time ? How do you know it wasn't toms hair to try to stop him . Remember neither of them had any wounds despite their weight difference and received no medical treatment . There were a lot more than 2 hits to the head I think you should read again

 

[Hotchips]

Hi everyone. First time poster here on this topic. After reading much of the thread I get the impression that there is a general feeling that this is clear cut, I.e. Overkill based on him moving to Ireland with the kids and she freaking out and her Dad intervened. But there are a lot of things that don't add up for me. <modsnip> There is no doubt it wasn't a happy marriage but that is not motive enough for murder. The real clue for me is the autopsy.....the finger injuries....if you were trying to kill someone why strike their fingers? The hand injuries were to the back of his hands, defence injuries are usually to the palm of the hands. Repeatedly striking the fingers implies to me someone trying to get him to release his grip on something....the middle finger had a number of bruises, if someone was choking me I'd pull at his fingers to get the hand to release....with my free hand I'd pick up whatever was on a bed side locker and strike him on the face ( fracture nose). Blood was also found under his nails and toenails which happens when you get your fingers caught in a door, so someone was hitting those fingers pretty hard. Most of the torso injuries are abrasions (scratches) which would match someone being pinned down scratching him to get him off. He was 160 lbs heavier than her. Plus autopsy removed pulled hair, whose hair was it? Either he pulled out his own hair ( highly unlikely) or it was hers? If TM came into the room, saw her pinned to the bed with naked JC choking her, he hits him on the hands, hits the fingers, hits the legs, this does not get the man off her, then strikes twice at close range to the head....could a man 25 years younger, 100lbs lighter been able to move him without such force? I don't know. I'm playing devils advocate here as most of the comments thus far haven't mentioned the very strange hand/finger injuries. Why didn't he fight back? If your life is in danger the body kicks into fight or flight mode; he did neither. Is that because he was choking her? A San Diego study of 600 strangulation victims showed 50% showed no visible signs of injury. The levels of drug in his system would not have rendered a man of his size unconscious. That drug however can be dangerous when mixed even with low levels of alcohol, clinical trials showing patients reporting mood swings and erratic behaviour including inexplicable rages. And then the kids testimony, defence are particularly keen on getting the Children's Services reports on what the children had to say. Perhaps they witnessed something earlier in the day, maybe they mentioned pervious rows that were had. In one of Mollys posts she references New Years Eve two years ago where she says she 'tries not to remember the bad things of that night'...whatever that means. I'm swaying more towards the involuntary manslaughter charge, a lot of the motive 'evidence' is circumstantial statements given by the Irish inlaws in a custody battle, there have been no impartial witnesses so far that have backed their claims ( teachers, neighbours etc). Maybe she was a lot of things, but murderer? And the Dad taking the rap? I'm not yet convinced. We have heard a very one sided version from the DA and have yet to hear the defences claims. I think they will be pretty explosive. So any thoughts on the pulled hair and finger/hand injuries id be interested in hearing them. The victim of course did not deserve to loose his life and don't mean to sound callous or insensitive. Just trying to flip this story to the other side and see if any of their claims do stand up especially in the autopsy report.

Welcome! I agree with a lot of your observations but wasn't brave enough to say some of them out loud...fear of being viewed as as victim blaming I suppose! Like you say all we have heard mostly so far reported is the prosecution side. The testimony released re the custody was as you say hearsay. I mentioned this myself in earlier posts. I suspect that molly had the teachers, sports coaches, neighbours etc giving evidence on her behalf but even though the records have apparently been released, the Irish press have only focused on what was said against her and I have searched and searched online but can't find them. Perhaps they haven't been published for fear of witness intimidation as the defence mentioned at the last hearing. They may be planning on using the same witnesses in the trial. I am intrigued by what the defence will have up their sleeve. They are keeping their cards close to their chest and have released virtually zero information or even a hint of what path they are taking other than self defence. Who knows what they could come out with. In terms of his hand injuries, when I read it first it did strike me that those injuries being on the back of his hand that they would have been caused by him hitting something or someone rather than defensive sounds but I discounted this when stated molly and tom had no injuries. Some of the abrasions on his torso and legs may have been caused by her kicking out and struggling if he had indeed caught her up by the throat. I do feel however that she was attacking him first and he retaliated. Possible they both flipped in a rage. The whole neck bruising thing, some bruise, some don't, depends on what part of the neck the force was on and for how long. This has been debated here but i do believe the results varies. My only knowledge in relation to neck bruising is that My sister was mugged some years ago and caught up forceably by the throat, but as it was very quick, perhaps only 30 secs or so, she didn't suffer any marks or bruising and the ER doctor said if he had grabbed her throat at a slightly different angle and force, the outcome could have been much different however that's not to say someone else would suffer distinct marks or bruising so in terms of whether he really did grab her by the throat, I am unsure if he did or not. We only have TMs word for that.

 

[Truthseeker79]

Seems like there is only one opinion on this thread and very little analysis of any other facts that have emerged. Yes true it can be asked what her family did/advised her if she disclosed DV to them but it can also be asked why until 2nd August his family did not seem to have any issues with her. The finger injuries, pulled hair, bruising to backs of hands ( defence injuries are usually palm or side of the hand, the diagram show them to the flat part of the backs of his hands). So while one side claim defence injuries, another could claim grip release injuries. Just saying it's plausible. The Martens were only interviewed once by the police, one initial examination...I'm sure they went and had their own examination done privately as would have been advised by their lawyers.....no visible 'injuries', redness would not be documented by police as an 'injury', hoarseness is not documented as an 'injury'. They record injuries as ones that need medical treatment. All I'm saying is that it would be interesting to see a bit of balanced debate, questioning the mere possibility that perhaps some of the injuries could be MM inflicting her own defence injuries. I don't believe a 5 ft 6 100lbs woman could single handed batter a 260lbs 6ft plus man and he not retaliate in any way, just surrendered to being beaten to death? Maybe she provoked him, struck him with something and broke his nose ( TM hears the shouting) leading to him dragging her by the hair and choking her in rage (TM enters seeing this).... Just looking at all possible scenarios. The middle finger having three separate bruises? You can't see how that sounds like someone pulling it backwards?

 

[Electric Sheep]

The real clue for me is the autopsy.....the finger injuries....if you were trying to kill someone why strike their fingers? The hand injuries were to the back of his hands, defence injuries are usually to the palm of the hands. Repeatedly striking the fingers implies to me someone trying to get him to release his grip on something....the middle finger had a number of bruises, if someone was choking me I'd pull at his fingers to get the hand to release....with my free hand I'd pick up whatever was on a bed side locker and strike him on the face ( fracture nose). Blood was also found under his nails and toenails which happens when you get your fingers caught in a door, so someone was hitting those fingers pretty hard. Most of the torso injuries are abrasions (scratches) which would match someone being pinned down scratching him to get him off. He was 160 lbs heavier than her. Plus autopsy removed pulled hair, whose hair was it? Either he pulled out his own hair ( highly unlikely) or it was hers? If TM came into the room, saw her pinned to the bed with naked JC choking her, he hits him on the hands, hits the fingers, hits the legs, this does not get the man off her, then strikes twice at close range to the head....could a man 25 years younger, 100lbs lighter been able to move him without such force?

Hi Truthseeker:

Your defensive wounds theory is intesting, and I will definitely have another look at the autopsy report.

I can't picture TM hitting Jason on the hands with a baseball bat while those hands were around Molly's neck though. Surely he would be more likely to injure Molly that way than to safely injure just Jason? There is always the possibility that there was something else he was trying to make Jason release, of course.

 

[kittythehare]

if someone was battering me on the head with a golf club or a bat or a rock, my instinct would be to place my hands over my head to shield it, with the backs of my hand uppermost.
I am unclear as to validation for the reference that palm of hand is a majority in defensive injuries? I even googled it and I could find nothing amomg peer reviewed and cited medical forensics to substantiate this claim.

 

[stmarysmead]

Remember there is tissue and splatter on the floor and walls. Think how often/hard Jason was hit, and how many times...to have his tissue splattering about.

It's hard to believe that if a large man had his hands around MM's neck that he could not have killed her, snapped her neck, before TM could take his second swing.

And hard to believe he couldn't have disarmed an old man or small woman...if it hasn't been a sneak attack.

Additionally, this wasn't...a strike till he stopped...this was heinous overkill with two weapons. Why the need to get a second weapon? Wasn't pummeling him with a bat sufficient enough? That second weapon is telling.

They had no right to issue a death penalty under any circumstances. Why wasn't her Mother calling 911? Why didn't they want police to come to help...maybe because they wanted to complete the task of killing him?

Those are my questions.

 

[stephanddoody]

I think he may be referring to evidence of when someone is trying to grab the object eg knife there are defensive marks on th palms from cutting . Blunt objects like LANDSCAPING STONES and BATS wouldn't have the same effect on the palms as a knife . I agree electric sheep why hit him on the hand left when Jasons hand is on his daughters throat so tight he won't let go ? I don't buy the scenario at all

 

[kittythehare]

I think he may be referring to evidence of when someone is trying to grab the object eg knife there are defensive marks on th palms from cutting . Blunt objects like LANDSCAPING STONES and BATS wouldn't have the same effect on the palms as a knife . I agree electric sheep why hit him on the hand left when Jasons hand is on his daughters throat so tight he won't let go ? I don't buy the scenario at all

well according to the forensics on strangulation, below, she would be well dead befor the 2nd blow was struck, it takes very little

 

[stmarysmead]

With the blows to his head by presumably the bat...why the need to get a second weapon? Why does a second person have to join in with another weapon.

Self defense...he hits him to stop him. Murder...they get him down and then , BOTH of them have at him...over and over...

There becomes an element of having to believe that an enjoyment of his agony set in. Because once he was down, two weapons come in to play...and they DO NOT STOP.

 

[Hotchips]

It is possible molly had hit him with the paving stone once or maybe twice or maybe not at all but had swung it at him making Jason struggle with her to disarm her just as TM came into the room with the bat and reacted. Little has been said about the paving stone other than it was at the scene and removed by police. No mention of blood or hair being found on it, that I can find anyway. Just another possible scenario that I have been leaning towards for some time.

 

[Electric Sheep]

It's hard to believe that if a large man had his hands around MM's neck that he could not have killed her, snapped her neck, before TM could take his second swing.

I somehow doubt that Jason would know how to snap someone's neck.

 

[MsArk]

Seems like there is only one opinion on this thread and very little analysis of any other facts that have emerged.[/B]

Snipped and BBM

And there are only three people who know exactly what happened that night. It goes without saying the autopsy report, physical evidence from the crime scene, LE observations etc are integral in "telling the tale" of the crime itself. But, what I've read on her social media accounts is very bizarre. JC would not allow MM to adopt the children and really, even in a good marriage I don't blame him. MM would have been the children's mother for all practical purposes even if she didn't formally adopt them? Why would she be so obsessed with that? It seems to me most rational women would accept the fact they married a widower/widow had children with a prior spouse. No reason to try to be something you aren't- their birth mother. Yet, if I understand correctly, she told her peers she was their birth mother and even told stories about her labor? Strange, strange behavior. (Control freak?)
She threw out her maid of honor and family member at the wedding over McDonalds! (Short fuse?)
I think we have to look at the totality of the physical evidence and relationship to get a full picture of what was going on at the time of JC's death.
And if it really was self defense, I hope they are both acquitted of the charges. DV is nothing to take lightly.
I just am on the opinion that MM was rapidly declining (maybe continues to do so?) psychologically, lost it and killed him. I very well may be wrong, though. A jury will hear the evidence and speak.

 

[Francesca]

Thank you for suggesting an alternate scenario, Truth seeker. Regarding the data that 50% of strangulation victims don't show visible signs of injury - it certainly shows that it is possible Molly could have been grabbed by the throat badly enough for her father and herself to feel justified in fighting back. However, the official statement quite comprehensively stated "that neither TM or MPC suffered any injury around their person." This would include the less obvious signs of injury beyond bruising, such as hoarseness of voice, difficulty swallowing, incontinence etc. It would also include if some of her hair had been pulled out by someone in a fight.
Your scenario is quite plausible in some respects, although it doesn't allow for the fact that JC had blood on his feet that had pooled under his toenails, so he was standing upright when he was hit hard enough to bleed heavily onto his own feet. Defense wounds found on the back of the hands are "passive" defense wounds when the victim has raised his hands to protect himself from a blow. Active defense wounds are caused from grasping the weapon (such as a knife) to actively stop the attack. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_wound
Also overkill is very difficult to reconcile with self defense. Someone else can correct me if I'm wrong about this but my impression from the autopsy report was that Jason received several blows to the head that were each individually capable of knocking him unconscious. This means that they/ he / she hit him hard enough that he could only shield his face from the next blow as he bled enough for his feet to become bloodied, then once he fell the assailant continued hitting him hard enough to cause further serious injury. This does not come across as a typical battered wife retaliation.
If Molly had ever filed a police report or seen her doctor for injuries relating to domestic violence while Jason was alive, this would be in the public domain so it would not be necessary for the defense to be sensitive about releasing that information. That kind of information is not withheld until trial, and it would affect the type of charges laid against the perpetrator. Usually the catalyst for a domestic crime is because the victim is trying to leave the relationship and the abuser escalates the violence; or because the children are directly in danger and the innocent party commits manslaughter to protect them from the abuser. Neither of these scenarios fit with Molly as the victim, firstly because Jason was about to go overseas without her, so she was free to walk out of the marriage and file for custody or access to the children (despite what the Martens say, she would have had a good chance of getting shared custody of the children she'd helped raise); secondly, because according to the Martens the children were never present at the crime scene so they were never in immediate danger from their father that night.
Overall, I agree that we need to consider every scenario to see which one "fits" the crime scene most accurately. I don't expect you to change your mind about your gut feeling regarding the crime, but if we all brainstorm what we know and eliminate what we only think we know, we could come up with a realistic scenario.

 

[Electric Sheep]

Yet, if I understand correctly, she told her peers she was their birth mother and even told stories about her labor? Strange, strange behavior. (Control freak?)
She threw out her maid of honor and family member at the wedding over McDonalds! (Short fuse?)
I think we have to look at the totality of the physical evidence and relationship to get a full picture of what was going on at the time of JC's death.

I believe both of those stories, like many others, are hearsay from Jason's side of the family. I am not inclined to swallow them wholesale myself.

 

[kittythehare]

I believe both of those stories, like many others, are hearsay from Jason's side of the family. I am not inclined to swallow them wholesale myself.

apart from the labor story the others are published here http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...olatile-nature-of-molly-martens-34349705.html Some were allegedly presented at the custody dispute in court.

 

[Electric Sheep]

If Molly had ever filed a police report or seen her doctor for injuries relating to domestic violence while Jason was alive, this would be in the public domain so it would not be necessary for the defense to be sensitive about releasing that information..

Any visit to a doctor would certainly NOT be in the public domain in the US, in fact it would be a serious HIPPA violation if it was.

 

[kittythehare]

Any visit to a doctor would certainly NOT be in the public domain in the US, in fact it would be a serious HIPPA violation if it was.

police reports would be public information, however and they had remarked they had received no complaints

 

[Electric Sheep]

apart from the labor story the others are published here http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...olatile-nature-of-molly-martens-34349705.html Some were allegedly presented at the custody dispute in court.

.

Yes, they were, with no evidence, just the say so of Jason's family. As I said, hearsay.

 

[kittythehare]

.

Yes, they were, with no evidence, just the say so of Jason's family. As I said, hearsay.

It may actually be sworn testimony. We are allowed to refer to media reports here.

 

[Electric Sheep]

It may actually be sworn testimony. We are allowed to refer to media reports here.

It may be sworn testimony or it may not. Of course we can refer to media reports here, but we are not obliged to believe them.