GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #4

[emmalpage81]

If we condone the tactics of this motion, suppose someone steps forward to say Mollys dead relative said she performed satanic rituals beating goats to death in the home. By standards of fairness, that should come in too?

In other words, anybody can make up anything if the "source" is dead?

Thank you! If we allow such shoddyness in professional ethics then people will be filing completely ludicrous motions all the time. There is a reason that lawyers have a code of conduct and a level of professionalism. For a firm who pride themselves on representing law enforcement it is, in my view, just not good enough.

All IMO

 

[stmarysmead]

The defense withdrew the motion. What more do you want?

I want the NC media to give as much publicity to the withdrawal of the Martens lie...in the size of the headline, to the placement on its front page of print edition and on the front page of Internet edition. I want equal publicity.

That's only fair. This trial is about credibility.

Lie.

Big, big Martens lie.

 

[kittythehare]

I want the NC media to give as much publicity to the withdrawal of the Martens lie...in the size of the headline, to the placement on its front page of print edition and on the front page of Internet edition. I want equal publicity.

That's only fair. This trial is about credibility.

Lie.

Big, big Martens lie.

I remeber finding family members on the shareholders list of one or more of those media sources a long time ago.. Stephen might know where it is.. I cannot be sure but have a feeling TM or ME may have ownd shares. Sorry I cant be more specific right now..

 

[searchinGirl]

Well I guess if the defense succeed in their last minute motion at least there are some other terms still available to the prosecution...placid, amiable, calm, sociable, trustworthy, mellow, composed, steady, gentle....all of these terms have been used by independent witnesses as testament to Jason's character. It is unusual for someone to be all of these other things and not be peaceful but I guess it would be up to the jury to figure out that contradiction!

This last minute motion is an attempt to keep this trial from turning into a circus. IMO

 

[emmalpage81]

This last minute motion is an attempt to keep this trial from turning into a circus. IMO

How is the prosecution putting forward evidence that they plan on expanding on during the trial somehow turning this into a circus? A defence who have disiminated blatant lies and mistruths and who have gone to the media in both the States and Ireland are the ones who have turned this trial into a circus.

The motion is a last ditch effort to thwart the prosecution from doing its job. Clutching at straws.

The defence cannot stop the proscution stating that JC was non-violent during opening if they have people going on the stand who plan on saying this.

All IMO

 

[emmalpage81]

I remeber finding family members on the shareholders list of one or more of those media sources a long time ago.. Stephen might know where it is.. I cannot be sure but have a feeling TM or ME may have ownd shares. Sorry I cant be more specific right now..

Now that is very interesting. We know TM was involved in shares. Stephan, can you elaborate?

 

[stmarysmead]

Consider this...if Molly was expected to manage her bipolar disease, her cocktail of changing medications, her insomnia, her infertility, her migraine headaches and still appear "perfect" in order to placate her parents pride...what an onerous burden on a sick, sick woman that had to be!

It explains the Facebook hoax of the "perfect" family. And it explains in part her rage at Jason who would leave her and blow that image apart. Maginn said that she had a belief that people despised her. Ms Strahahan said she kept herself apart socially.

Now imagine that somehow she is acquitted. Think of the stress now! She has her whole life to live with Jason's killing always on the Internet, social media...a cloud of horror forever hovering around her. Think of how much control she will need, every hour, every day...as Molly will be forever watched. Think of the rages she will have to suppress, the thoughts that she will carry now about how she is perceived.

And the Martens will not be exempt. The family secret was splattered on the wall with Jason's brain matter. Even those who claim to support her, will remember. And every time the phone rings, the Martens will live in fear of what she has done now. They will live with the memory of what they saw in that bedroom...and the anxiety that one day, someone will set Molly 's murderous rage off again.

One slip. One bad day.

I believe they are headed to prison, either physical or emotional...either way.

 

[searchinGirl]

How is the prosecution putting forward evidence that they plan on expanding on during the trial somehow turning this into a circus? A defence who have disiminated blatant lies and mistruths and who have gone to the media in both the States and Ireland are the ones who have turned this trial into a circus.

The motion is a last ditch effort to thwart the prosecution from doing its job. Clutching at straws.

The defence cannot stop the proscution stating that JC was non-violent during opening if they have people going on the stand who plan on saying this.

All IMO

As difficult as this may be for some to understand, this trial is conducted on behalf of the defendants rights. Decisions will be made on that basis. This is American Justice. Innocent until proven guilty.

 

[stmarysmead]

As difficult as this may be for some to understand, this trial is conducted on behalf of the defendants rights. Decisions will be made on that basis. This is American Justice. Innocent until proven guilty.

Victims have rights in America too. The families of victims have rights. This trial is conducted to provide justice, not on "behalf of the defendants rights."

Justice is blind not on the side if the defendant.

 

[searchinGirl]

Consider this...if Molly was expected to manage her bipolar disease, her cocktail of changing medications, her insomnia, her infertility, her migraine headaches and still appear "perfect" in order to placate her parents pride...what an onerous burden on a sick, sick woman that had to be!

It explains the Facebook hoax of the "perfect" family. And it explains in part her rage at Jason who would leave her and blow that image apart. Maginn said that she had a belief that people despised her. Ms Strahahan said she kept herself apart socially.

Now imagine that somehow she is acquitted. Think of the stress now! She has her whole life to live with Jason's killing always on the Internet, social media...a cloud of horror forever hovering around her. Think of how much control she will need, every hour, every day...as Molly will be forever watched. Think of the rages she will have to suppress, the thoughts that she will carry now about how she is perceived.

And the Martens will not be exempt. The family secret was splattered on the wall with Jason's brain matter. Even those who claim to support her, will remember. And every time the phone rings, the Martens will live in fear of what she has done now. They will live with the memory of what they saw in that bedroom...and the anxiety that one day, someone will set Molly 's murderous rage off again.

One slip. One bad day.

I believe they are headed to prison, either physical or emotional...either way.

For all you know, or myself for that matter, Molly may be just fine.

 

[searchinGirl]

Victims have rights in America too. The families of victims have rights. This trial is conducted to provide justice, not on "behalf of the defendants rights."

Justice is blind not on the side if the defendant.

Sorry but they have right to a fair trial. To suggest otherwise is not correct.

 

[emmalpage81]

As difficult as this may be for some to understand, this trial is conducted on behalf of the defendants rights. Decisions will be made on that basis. This is American Justice. Innocent until proven guilty.

I'm sorry, i must have missed that class, a trial is not conducted on behalf of the defendants rights and I would love to see some legislation to show this. A trial is for the prosecution to put forward facts to prove a charge, the defence are to debunk these assertions or prove reasonable doubt.

An opening statement is for both parties to put forward their idea of what occured. The rules state that the parties only put forward instances that will then be expanded upon with evidence from witnesses. A defendant cannot limit what a prosecutor says in opening unless they have a reasonable expectation that what is said will not be brougth up during the trial.

This is the law, American or otherwise.

All IMO

 

[stmarysmead]

For all you know, or myself for that matter, Molly may be just fine.

Molly has admitted having bipolar disease. That is a serious diagnosis. Not "just fine." Life would be challenging for anyone after a murder accusation. For someone with a profound sense of self loathing that has been accused of something atrocious, heinous and cruel.

oh my.

 

[searchinGirl]

I'm sorry, i must have missed that class, a trial is not conducted on behalf of the defendants rights and I would love to see some legislation to show this. A trial is for the prosecution to put forward facts to prove a charge, the defence are to debunk these assertions or prove reasonable doubt.

An opening statement is for both parties to put forward their idea of what occured. The rules state that the parties only put forward instances that will then be expanded upon with evidence from witnesses. A defendant cannot limit what a prosecutor says in opening unless they have a reasonable expectation that what is said will not be brougth up during the trial.

This is the law, American or otherwise.

All IMO

It's not guilty until proven innocent.

 

[stmarysmead]

I'm sorry, i must have missed that class, a trial is not conducted on behalf of the defendants rights and I would love to see some legislation to show this. A trial is for the prosecution to put forward facts to prove a charge, the defence are to debunk these assertions or prove reasonable doubt.

An opening statement is for both parties to put forward their idea of what occured. The rules state that the parties only put forward instances that will then be expanded upon with evidence from witnesses. A defendant cannot limit what a prosecutor says in opening unless they have a reasonable expectation that what is said will not be brougth up during the trial.

This is the law, American or otherwise.

All IMO

There's seems to be a desire for a trial where everything positive about MM comes in along with anything negative about the murder victim Jason. Lies about Jason attributed to the Dead should be considered, but information from a living ex-fiancé should be hidden from the jury. Only certain interviews with the children that fa or MM should be allowed, the other two must be stricken before the jury can hear them.

This is not justice in America. And anyone advocating this kind of trial, would do a complete turnabout if their loved one was the murder victim.

That's what is so sad.

If it

 

[stmarysmead]

It's not guilty until proven innocent.

But our justice system is about justice. Jason is innocent of Mollys charges as well...or are you wanting that right denied him as well?

 

[emmalpage81]

It's not guilty until proven innocent.

Absolutely, so the prosecution can put out any evidence they have to prove guilt. The defence cannot hinder this.

All IMO

 

[searchinGirl]

Molly has admitted having bipolar disease. That is a serious diagnosis. Not "just fine." Life would be challenging for anyone after a murder accusation. For someone with a profound sense of self loathing that has been accused of something atrocious, heinous and cruel.

oh my.

I know that some think there is a smoking gun in Maginns book, but not a thing in it proves murder. Quite the opposite. As I recall, Molly would retreat in a fight, not get overly aggressive and provoke the guy to harm her.

 

[searchinGirl]

Absolutely, so the prosecution can put out any evidence they have to prove guilt. The defence cannot hinder this.

All IMO

So, are you saying that Molly being bipolar is direct evidence of her guilt?

 

[stmarysmead]

Molly (the FBI agent's daughter) never made her accusations against Jason in a court of law where he could defend himself, where she might have received custody of the children. Where is "innocent till proven guilty" standard being applied with a fair and equal hand?

Jason was never given a chance to prove his innocence. He was brutally killed instead?

Innocent until,PROVEN guilty...in regard to these smears against the victim...are the least we should demand.