JerseyGirl
Retired Forum Coordinator
- Joined
- May 15, 2013
- Messages
- 55,636
- Reaction score
- 192,987
Luke Air Force Base airman on trial in Arizona in death of Mennonite woman
Looks like Mr Gooch isn't having a great time in jail going by this photo of his appearance yesterday.
The court isn't in session today - Opening statements scheduled for Friday
Dang, that's a huge shiner. Moo.Luke Air Force Base airman on trial in Arizona in death of Mennonite woman
Looks like Mr Gooch isn't having a great time in jail going by this photo of his appearance yesterday.
The court isn't in session today - Opening statements scheduled for Friday
Judge giving very clear instructions on what a jury can or cannot do, and how the trial will proceed, I think every judge should do this at start of trial, many I have seen just give the do not speak to anybody about case or amongst fellow jurors, or look at TV social media etc. This judge is explaining everything.
I think the defence may lose the jury if they continue to go after sasha ever going outside without her head covering, she was found without her head covering and defence want to argue she went out that night without her head covering as the state will argue the defendant took her head covering because of his issues with the church,
and am unsure how going after her fellow mennonite Lucinda who Sasha had issues with, but he has to point the finger at others if he is to get a NG
Actually -- the defendant allegedly gave the gun to his brother who pled guilty in 2020 and was sentenced to 3 years probation. From the YT link:from openings the state has the 22 rifle matched to the bullet from Sasha that the defendant gave to a friend to look after, they have lots of cell phone data showing defendants movements, no DNA, no fingerprints, so far I think they have evidence showing he could have committed the murder, but as to whether he did I will need much more from that state proving it,
and I am still confused as to why the state agreed to the stipulation that she was not sexually assaulted, they do not know if he touched her breasts or if he put his hand up her skirt or where he may have touched her, so why would you state she was not sexually assaulted just because their was no semen or sperm or evidence of vaginal penetration doesn't exclude any or all types of sexual assault, he did take her underwear so to me that would appear to be sexual in nature,
I think so far for me the defence is doing a better job
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.