GUILTY NC - Jason Corbett, 39, murdered in his Wallburg home, 2 Aug 2015 #7

[Hotchips]

[video=twitter;892387065928839168]https://twitter.com/lexdispatchbc/status/892387065928839168[/video]

[video=twitter;892387261005869056]https://twitter.com/lexdispatchbc/status/892387261005869056[/video]

I hope the prosecution tread carefully here. It could prove to be a serious red herring if this witness falls apart. Not sure in what circumstances TM would be discussing personal opinions about his son in law with Jason's work colleagues...if this is an opinion this witness... A lady I have noted, has formed from chats, It could go very wrong.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

 

[Be true]

[video=twitter;892389253870649345]https://twitter.com/tvtdaniel/status/892389253870649345[/video]

Then I take it its not sbout DV because the defence would want that testimony it has to be in relation to another issue between JC and tm.

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

 

[Hotchips]

[video=twitter;892389253870649345]https://twitter.com/tvtdaniel/status/892389253870649345[/video]



[video=twitter;892381590680211457]https://twitter.com/mhewlettwsj/status/892381590680211457[/video]

OK so it's a coworker of TM... Sorry I thought it was a Co worker of jason and this was stated in our very reliable newspapers that a witness from MPS would be there this morning. Either way, could suit the defence quite nicely

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

 

[stephanddoody]

Personally I think if it would be in any way beneficial to the defence they wouldn't be arguing so intensely to have the witness dismissed

 

[Frizby]

As the defence entered testimony as to how much he liked Jason and was looking forward to playing golf with him the following day, you would think that rebuttal evidence should be allowed by the prosecution. Let's hope she is allowed testify.

 

[stephanddoody]

[video=twitter;892395064240078848]https://twitter.com/mhewlettwsj/status/892395064240078848[/video]

 

[Be true]

It's got to the stage now that defence "doth protest too much" I understand the way a defence is supposed to work but it's like the only defence at the moment is to object to anything that appears to squash the defence which is almost everything that has been said imo

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

 

[Frizby]

Judge is allowing the testimony. So the squeaky clean, all American dad, Jason was my buddy, mask is going to slip.

 

[Hotchips]

It's got to the stage now that defence "doth protest too much" I understand the way a defence is supposed to work but it's like the only defence at the moment is to object to anything that appears to squash the defence which is almost everything that has been said imo

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

That's exactly it! If they don't protest as much as they can, it could be said they didn't provide them with a full and proper defence.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

 

[stephanddoody]

[video=twitter;892397250239922176]https://twitter.com/lexdispatchbc/status/892397250239922176[/video]



[video=twitter;892397418737750016]https://twitter.com/lexdispatchbc/status/892397418737750016[/video]

 

[Hotchips]

Judge is allowing the testimony. So the squeaky clean, all American dad, Jason was my buddy, mask is going to slip.

This should be interesting but hopefully approached with caution. Hope she's not a disgruntled ex colleague of his that he supervised. If so she won't serve the prosecution case too well. Always a danger in introducing former colleagues in any situation.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

 

[stephanddoody]

[video=twitter;892398143337320451]https://twitter.com/lexdispatchbc/status/892398143337320451[/video]

 

[Be true]

How might it incriminate her does anyone know?

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

Just clicked with me could it be over if not letting her adopt?

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

 

[Tipplass]

Just clicked with me could it be over if not letting her adopt?

Sent from my SM-T561 using Tapatalk

That's what I was thinking also..

 

[Logic-lady]

As the defence entered testimony as to how much he liked Jason and was looking forward to playing golf with him the following day, you would think that rebuttal evidence should be allowed by the prosecution. Let's hope she is allowed testify.

Totally agree, this goes to the credibility of the defendants and what they have entered as their defense testimony thus far in the case.

 

[Logic-lady]

This should be interesting but hopefully approached with caution. Hope she's not a disgruntled ex colleague of his that he supervised. If so she won't serve the prosecution case too well. Always a danger in introducing former colleagues in any situation.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

I agree, if she was invited to the pre-wedding function and he liked her enough to confide in her then I'm hoping they are/were still on good terms (perhaps not after she testified against him in court!) ...interesting word to use though, hate....hate causes rage....hate causes overkill IMO.

 

[robinhood]

I think the point is well taken that Molly could not have subdued an awakened Jason. He had to have been asleep or drugged. So if the FBI man had his daughter awaken him and say she thinks she killed her husband, he's going to assess the scene. No one will accept she could take Jason down without incapacitating him. If she did, that is Murder One.

How do we save Molly, keep the kids in our family? That's when Tom decided to insert himself. He would do what his experience told him was their best option.

The DV accusation and Tom as hero and the only assailant ( at first) ...was the only option they had that might work. Tom would handle it all. Sharon must stay completely out of it.

It is and was their only shot. Tom wasn't trying to save his daughter with a bat...but with his trained FBI brain.

I do think it was never about the kids. it was all about the money. to suggest the kids were the main concern would have meant their mental state in years to come would have been given consideration. these are cold blooded killers IMO. The kids were the access to the money.

 

[Frizby]

I do think it was never about the kids. it was all about the money. to suggest the kids were the main concern would have meant their mental state in years to come would have been given consideration. these are cold blooded killers IMO. The kids were the access to the money.

I think it was about the whole package, the kids, the money, the trophy house, the holidays, the image. Only problem was Jason came with that package, Jason leaves and the whole package gets dismantled.

 

[lstiff]

I think it was about the whole package, the kids, the money, the trophy house, the holidays, the image. Only problem was Jason came with that package, Jason leaves and the whole package gets dismantled.

My first time posting on this thread but I agree with this 100%. I think it was the entire "image package" that was the motivation.

IMO

 

[Frizby]

My first time posting on this thread but I agree with this 100%. I think it was the entire "image package" that was the motivation.

IMO

:welcome: We are a friendly bunch