GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #3

[kittythehare]

those drugs you refer to that take care of the problem here in the states cost about $15/pill and most insurance doesn't cover it...poor man's viagara...

No. I was actually referring to viagra or its most modern equivalent.
Jason was not poor.
he took care of his health.
but we have discussed it umpteenth times already. for no good reason.

 

[stephanddoody]

those drugs you refer to that take care of the problem here in the states cost about $15/pill and most insurance doesn't cover it...poor man's viagara...

we have seen that Jason is not in any way a poor man. I think if marital rape was going to be used it might have been mentioned at the time and also during the interview there is no reason that it wouldn't be if it was the case this is nothing to ashamed about on her part and would back up the self defence claims even more . You can't just change your story as you go along its not credible and credibility to a jury means a lot

 

[kittythehare]

we have seen that Jason is not in any way a poor man. I think if marital rape was going to be used it might have been mentioned at the time and also during the interview there is no reason that it wouldn't be if it was the case this is nothing to ashamed about on her part and would back up the self defence claims even more . You can't just change your story as you go along its not credible and credibility to a jury means a lot

Like you said, we are not pulling together.
Marital rape has nothing to do with this case.
Jason's blood c2h5OH level has nothing to do with the case.
the trazadone in his system has nothing to do with this case.
all the lies and stupid headline grabbing tactics of her lawyers and Tom's lawyers have nothing to do with this case.
Malice is all that informs this case.

 

[searchinGirl]

No. I was actually referring to viagra or its most modern equivalent.
Jason was not poor.
he took care of his health.
but we have discussed it umpteenth times already. for no good reason.

So why was it in his system?...I'm trying to look at all the ways Holton might try to defend her...what are the "good reasons"?

 

[stmarysmead]

Something that puzzles me. It has been mentioned that MM's parents were sleeping in a finished bedroom suite in the basement level. I wonder if the home had that suite when Jason purchased it? Either way, MM's parents were just staying there a few days before... during Wayne's (Jason's twin) visit. They vacationed a lot with JC C and MM, according to FB pictures. I'm wondering if the DA will look into how much time the parents spent with JC and TM? Because it certainly is odd for an abuser or rapist to welcome his inlaws so often into his home or on his vacations. Usually, they isolate their "victims." Cut them off from family and friends.

Not in this case. JC sure had her family around a lot.

Did he even finish a suite in his home for their convenience?

One of the defense lawyers said TM had a "good relationship" with JC...they "golfed together."

Odd, if this man is raping or abusing your daughter.

Then there is the wake up...TM wakes up in the guest room. Was MM screaming "Help me? " Certainly not while she was being choked. Was she screaming "Help me!" for some situation that left no marks or bruises?

I'm thinking if I had a good relationship with my son-in-law, and I heard a loud fight...why would I arm myself to go upstairs?

Are you going to say...because TM knew JC was an abuser? Really? And yet he would leave his daughter in that situation while he and his wife lived hours away?

None of this fits. These are educated people, with the money and the contacts and the FBI connections to bring havoc to Jason's life.

Just doesn't work for me.

 

[kittythehare]

So why was it in his system?...I'm trying to look at all the ways Holton might try to defend her...what are the "good reasons"?

She could well have been systematically poisoning him.
She quite possibly spiked him every day because she quite likely was aware of his existing heart condition.
Holton cannot defend her and he should not be defending or prosecuting anybody, he should be disbarred, and if the larger US media pick up on this case, there is a chance they may, they will be looking at his practice and his press calls and the US Bar will be called to account.
its a very big story.
There are many aspects from an investigative journalism aspect. That will require a media with a very large budget.
The role of the FBI will be examined, if they have one.
There are matters of National security at stake here.
Its hardcore.
I dont care a whit how he defends her, quite honestly. I have seen his tactics, they are filthy and unworthy of the US Bar association.
thats all we really need to now.

 

[searchinGirl]

She could well have been systematically poisoning him.
She quite possibly spiked him every day because she quite likely was aware of his existing heart condition.
Holton cannot defend her and he should not be defending or prosecuting anybody, he should be disbarred, and if the larger US media pick up on this case, there is a chance they may, they will be looking at his practice and his press calls and the US Bar will be called to account.
its a very big story.
There are many aspects from an investigative journalism aspect. That will require a media with a very large budget.
The role of the FBI will be examined, if they have one.
There are matters of National security at stake here.
Its hardcore.
I dont care a whit how he defends her, quite honestly. I have seen his tactics, they are filthy and unworthy of the US Bar association.
thats all we really need to now.

<modsnip> why should he be disbarred?...he's good...maybe good enough to get her off...

 

[stmarysmead]

So why was it in his system?...I'm trying to look at all the ways Holton might try to defend her...what are the "good reasons"?

Maybe because she drugged him so she could beat his brains out?

 

[stmarysmead]

I can tell you're angry...why should he be disbarred?...he's good...maybe good enough to get her off...

An defense attorney in any case is only as "good" as the client he has to defend. Molly has told foolish lies, easily discounted lies. Any "good" lawyer would be pulling his hair out now. Any chef , no matter how esteemed...can only do so much with mutton.

 

[stmarysmead]

But you asked for an explanation, and there is no outrage in that post...it's my honest opinion. Certainly, a purposeful drugging is one possible explanation.

I've already stated that I do appreciate hearing other aalternatives. But, I do reserve the right to counter with another explanation. It's all good.

 

[searchinGirl]

But you asked for an explanation, and there is no outrage in that post...it's my honest opinion.

And maybe he took the trazodone so he and Molly could have "enhanced sex" but she changed her mind and he got angry and pushed her and she retaliated with intense overkill...did it ever occur to you that the jury might look at the autopsy report and want to know what he did to get beaten like that?

 

[kittythehare]

And maybe he took the trazodone so he and Molly could have "enhanced sex" but she changed her mind and he got angry and pushed her and she retaliated with intense overkill...did it ever occur to you that the jury might look at the autopsy report and want to know what he did to get beaten like that?

Its possible it was Sharon too..
Where was Sharon?
Sharon could have been the one who inflicted the fatal blows.

'what did he do to cause his own heinous atrocious and cruel murder?
Cannot imagine how one could bring that upon oneself unless one paid some folks to beat him to death?

 

[stmarysmead]

And maybe he took the trazodone so he and Molly could have "enhanced sex" but she changed her mind and he got angry and pushed her and she retaliated with intense overkill...did it ever occur to you that the jury might look at the autopsy report and want to know what he did to get beaten like that?

The problem is...that nothing he did...under US law...allowed MM to execute the death penalty. There were three of them against one. I include SM because she could have been dialing 911.

And again, whatever JC was "doing" ...it left not a mark, or bump or bruise on either of his killers.

Do you have a scenario...to help out our discussion...of something JC might have been doing...that would lead a jury to believe MM was entitled to beat him over and over with such heinous intensity? What would be the "Oh, okay...he had it coming" explanation...?

 

[Sparky]

STOP

The rudeness. Scroll and roll if you don't like a post. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Thanks!

 

[stmarysmead]

And maybe he took the trazodone so he and Molly could have "enhanced sex" but she changed her mind and he got angry and pushed her and she retaliated with intense overkill...did it ever occur to you that the jury might look at the autopsy report and want to know what he did to get beaten like that?

Do you think a jury would acquit a defendant who, along with her Father, used a bat and a brick to beat her husband to death...because he pushed her when she would not give him sex?

I point this out only to show the problems facing the Defense.

 

[stmarysmead]

The Defense is arguing a "justifiable" homicide. That's the key word. They are promising to show that they HAD to kill him. That they were "justified."

Now, if when police arrived, MM had had broken ribs and black eyes and TM had hands bruised from the battering JC gave to those hands that held the bat, a reasonable jury could call this a "donnybrook" and one of the equal combatants sadly lost his life. But the fact that neither of them had any marks or bruises, almost suggests what the beating of a helpless invalid or a child looks like. In my mind, he just wouldn't hit his wife or an old man.

So Jason took it all, only defensive injuries...and he died.

 

[searchinGirl]

Thank you, you have made my post clearer. I never intended my post to be read as people discounting completely or overlooking the autopsy report. It is what it is, proves overkill, but that is not case closed. The other side must be examined too and the jury will want to see both the autopsy and hear the background. You are right, the defence will attempt to pick apart the prosecution case, they have started turning the wheels already here with critisizing the investigation and making reference to the drugs and alcohol in jasons system. All they have to do is create doubt.....doubt as to whether the investigation has been conducted fairly and properly by both the police and DAs office, and doubt as to Jason's character and that of his family to name a couple . On the upside, that is good for the prosecution, they now have an indication of how the defence are proceeding and her lawyers response to the DM article cements that. Following the article in the DM, I feel if KM is to be a prosecution witness, the defence can cross examine him and could well turn it around very much in MMs favour.

KM said he was doing the right thing by outing Molly for the sake of the children but that's a moot point because the children are safely in the custody of the Corbetts and Fitzgeralds in Ireland...that Molly would lie to keep the children doesn't prove her to be a murderer, nor does it prove that she lies about everything else - it is prejudicial...If KM hasn't already been listed as a witness in the criminal trial then I think the prosecution would have to petition the court to add him and state how he helps prove their theory...as you say, all the defense has to do is create reasonable doubt...and, I fear there is a case to be made that the Irish press is trying to prevent Molly from getting a fair trial...

 

[Frizby]

KM said he was doing the right thing by outing Molly for the sake of the children but that's a moot point because the children are safely in the custody of the Corbetts and Fitzgeralds in Ireland...that Molly would lie to keep the children doesn't prove her to be a murderer, nor does it prove that she lies about everything else - it is prejudicial...If KM hasn't already been listed as a witness in the criminal trial then I think the prosecution would have to petition the court to add him and state how he helps prove their theory...as you say, all the defense has to do is create reasonable doubt...and, I fear there is a case to be made that the Irish press is trying to prevent Molly from getting a fair trial...

But he never said he was doing this for the sake of the children. What he said about speaking out is as follows....

Keith said he was compelled to speak out about his experience with Ms Martens after she claimed in court during a hearing for custody of Mr Corbett's children that her mental health issues were historical.

"I know she has denied being bipolar and taking meds during the custody hearing" he said. "That is unbelievable to me how she could deny that. It is documented that she was seeing doctors (while he was seeing her). "I just feel that Mr Corbett's family need the truth to be out there. What if she had got the kids? Had they (the courts) known what I know, that would never have happened. I want the truth to be out there so that all the facts can be gathered and justice can be done"

 

[stmarysmead]

KM said he was doing the right thing by outing Molly for the sake of the children but that's a moot point because the children are safely in the custody of the Corbetts and Fitzgeralds in Ireland...that Molly would lie to keep the children doesn't prove her to be a murderer, nor does it prove that she lies about everything else - it is prejudicial...If KM hasn't already been listed as a witness in the criminal trial then I think the prosecution would have to petition the court to add him and state how he helps prove their theory...as you say, all the defense has to do is create reasonable doubt...and, I fear there is a case to be made that the Irish press is trying to prevent Molly from getting a fair trial...

I disagree. The point of KM's book that is pertinent is more than her capacity to lie; it is a personal chronology of life with a chaotic sick individual. Indeed, that individual is still threatening, thru Uncle Mike, to resume her attempts to regain the minor children of her murder victim. That is certainly impetus enough for someone who had the difficult experiences KM endured with her, and read about this crime and Jason's horrific injuries... to feel he needed to step forward. I admire his courage immensely.

His testimony could be limited to discussing his book written years before Molys notieriety, and simply used to counter MM's credibility. His testimony could be coupled with hospital records from Emory and pharmacy records from Wallburg. I think there are many ways his testimony can be used and quite beneficial to the Prosecution.

As far as the Irish press, I don't know that many residents of NC regularly subscribe to the Irish media. Has it been reported in the US media? I haven't seen it yet. I have to tell you, prior to our time here together, I could not have named one single newspaper anywhere in Ireland. lol.

 

[searchinGirl]

But he never said he was doing this for the sake of the children. What he said about speaking out is as follows....Keith said he was compelled to speak out about his experience with Ms Martens after she claimed in court during a hearing for custody of Mr Corbett's children that her mental health issues were historical. "I know she has denied being bipolar and taking meds during the custody hearing" he said. "That is unbelievable to me how she could deny that. It is documented that she was seeing doctors (while he was seeing her). "I just feel that Mr Corbett's family need the truth to be out there. What if she had got the kids? Had they (the courts) known what I know, that would never have happened. I want the truth to be out there so that all the facts can be gathered and justice can be done"

What if she had gotten the kids?...then he would have had good reason to speak out in my opinion...but what if she did make a clean break and hasn't taken bipolar drugs for 8 years?...then what?...if she can prove that she hasn't, does that acquit her of the murder?