NH NH - Elizabeth Marriott, 19, Durham, 9 Oct 2012 - # 9 *S. Mazzaglia guilty*

[angiefly2]

More absurdly, we have an attorney who dug through some literature he didn't understand, and is asking extremely stupid questions about it.

I just choked on my sprite... thanks a lot Skigirl :floorlaugh:

 

[AnnieMagnolia]

This is what you get when you have two guilty people on opposite sides of one case. The state doesn't want to implicate their star witness, the defense want to defend theirs. This is a nightmare for the jury and for the victim's family. Both sides are gingerly stepping around the lies and the truth is lost.

 

[borndem]

Grrrrr. Now he's just trying to confuse the jury, IMO. He needs to stop.

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

This is not going well for Barth.

I think Barth confused himself. Circulation may be restored but the oxygen deprived brain remains dead. Even I got what the expert was saying....

 

[Skigirl]

What an jerk. Instead of just backing off when she answers truthfully and it's not what he wants to hear, he has to get in a little jab about how if he is confusing her and how he'll just have to take it up with the jury. She was not confused. She did not follow his logic because there was no logic. I hope, hope, hope, hope there are at least a few people like me on the jury that that sort of behavior rubs the wrong way.

 

[Xara]

What an jerk. Instead of just backing off when she answers truthfully and it's not what he wants to hear, he has to get in a little jab about how if he is confusing her and how he'll just have to take it up with the jury. She was not confused. She did not follow his logic because there was no logic. I hope, hope, hope, hope there are at least a few people like me on the jury that that sort of behavior rubs the wrong way.

It is totally obvious to me that she is far from confused.

 

[Skigirl]

OMG, poor Cheryl M. and Mara.

Wow, this is brutal.

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

What an jerk. Instead of just backing off when she answers truthfully and it's not what he wants to hear, he has to get in a little jab about how if he is confusing her and how he'll just have to take it up with the jury. She was not confused. She did not follow his logic because there was no logic. I hope, hope, hope, hope there are at least a few people like me on the jury that that sort of behavior rubs the wrong way.

Yes, yes, yes. If I was on that jury I would be annoyed with him. He insists on picking at every one of the examples. And for what? What is the outcome? That the expert knows what she is talking about and Barth looks like a bully? How does that go over with a jury?

 

[zoey]

What an jerk. Instead of just backing off when she answers truthfully and it's not what he wants to hear, he has to get in a little jab about how if he is confusing her and how he'll just have to take it up with the jury. She was not confused. She did not follow his logic because there was no logic. I hope, hope, hope, hope there are at least a few people like me on the jury that that sort of behavior rubs the wrong way.

and you know the State will be up and he'll be back.....:banghead::banghead:

 

[AnnieMagnolia]

If I were on this jury I would be angry at this point. None of these other deaths being discussed have anything to do with this case. I would hope to be able to find SM guilty of premeditated murder and make some kind of statement that KM's statements made under oath were not believable so her deal would sink down to Davy Jone's locker.

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

Did Barth just try to mislead this witness with erroneous information about a beating which turns out to be part of the strangulation? :maddening:

 

[epiphany]

Witness becoming increasingly frustrated, irritated and annoyed imo.

Hope he isn't able to wear her down...

Chief Med Examiner V Defense Atty: both doing their jobs to best of their abilities; both experienced professionals

 

[Xara]

and you know the State will be up and he'll be back.....:banghead::banghead:

I'm sure they will, but she is holding her own IMO.

 

[Skigirl]

"It doesn't sound like they are doing the sort of external exam that I would do if I were doing an autopsy." She is the queen of understatement.

 

[Nymeria]

She should not mention going by the GJ testimony.
I doubt the jury places much weight on that information.

 

[turaj]

I only hope that the ex girlfriend can hold up to Barth as well as this woman...but it is doubtful.

 

[zoey]

She should not mention going by the GJ testimony.
I doubt the jury places much weight on that information.

That's all she's got for this case

 

[Skigirl]

Hahaha!!! "I don't think I called that a 'treatise' -- that was just a google search."

 

[turaj]

I think Barth should give up...she is really good.

 

[minor4th]

What an jerk. Instead of just backing off when she answers truthfully and it's not what he wants to hear, he has to get in a little jab about how if he is confusing her and how he'll just have to take it up with the jury. She was not confused. She did not follow his logic because there was no logic. I hope, hope, hope, hope there are at least a few people like me on the jury that that sort of behavior rubs the wrong way.

It is really unusual for experts to be treated this way during cross examination