OH - Emily Noble, 52, Westerville, 24 May 2020 *husband not guilty*

[RandomName479]

ok....I went back to listen to the actual testimony. Around 7:20:00 Day 4 on Law and Crime Network youtube.

Paraphrasing here, but my understanding is that the cord was doubled over, that loop was around her neck, it was wrapped around the branch twice, one end was laying on the back of her neck and the other end is "in the middle of the photograph" (whatever that means). The hard plastic end got caught in a "loop" somewhere which was what was keeping everything together.

I can't find the section at the moment where he talked about the cuts he made to the cord - it was when he was saying he cut her down as per instructions from the coroner (I believe).

That prosecutor is grating

 

[geevee]

I've been wavering back and forth all through the trial, but the injuries to her nose area seems like it couldn't have come from hanging herself in the usb sling, so the needle has moved somewhat to the prosecution side for me. For now anyway, we'll see what the pathologist and coroner have to say.

I'm so curious about why both their clothes were in the 2nd bathroom hamper, I was glad to see a juror ask about that but wish we'd had some kind of answer.

I also noticed in the anthropologist's pic of the bones laid out that the two last finger bones of the left hand looked to be missing, did they come off when she was removed from the sling, allowing the wedding rings to slip underneath where she was?

 

[Gardenista]

I've been wavering back and forth all through the trial, but the injuries to her nose area seems like it couldn't have come from hanging herself in the usb sling, so the needle has moved somewhat to the prosecution side for me. For now anyway, we'll see what the pathologist and coroner have to say.

I'm so curious about why both their clothes were in the 2nd bathroom hamper, I was glad to see a juror ask about that but wish we'd had some kind of answer.

I also noticed in the anthropologist's pic of the bones laid out that the two last finger bones of the left hand looked to be missing, did they come off when she was removed from the sling, allowing the wedding rings to slip underneath where she was?

Apparently the defense has an expert who is going to say there are no fractures in the nasal bones and the hyoid fracture is common in people over 40 because the cartilage ossifies or something like that.
Diane said she is one of 1 of only 100 board certified forensic anthropologists.

I looked her up and was reminded she testified for the prosecution in the Mollie Tibbetts trial. Her website says she was involved in the original description and analysis of the naledi remains. There are tons of links about it, here's one:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/🤬🤬🤬🤬-naledi-human-evolution-science

She also has this cool website to ID bones

OsteoID Bone Identification

boneidentification.com

 

[geevee]

Apparently the defense has an expert who is going to say there are no fractures in the nasal bones and the hyoid fracture is common in people over 40 because the cartilage ossifies or something like that.
Diane said she is one of 1 of only 100 board certified forensic anthropologists.

I looked her up and was reminded she testified for the prosecution in the Mollie Tibbetts trial. Her website says she was involved in the original description and analysis of the *advertiser censored* naledi remains. There are tons of links about it, here's one:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...iser censored*-naledi-human-evolution-science

She also has this cool website to ID bones

OsteoID Bone Identification

boneidentification.com

Thanks Gardenista, I remember the Tibbett's trial quite well, it'll be nice to see a familiar face on the stand.

I couldn't get the NatGeo link to open but the bone ID site is cool.

 

[megs1477]

Thanks - I wish there was a photo of the whole "hanging apparatus".....I don't see the point of the knot.

So the USB cord was long and doubled over - Was it anchored anywhere? As far as I can tell it wasn't tied to the branch, so where did the force come from? Was her neck in the "loop" that would be made from doubling up the cord or was a "noose" made? I don't know why I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this

7:21.37 OF The Law & Crime link above.

 

[charminglane]

@Gardenista-
Thanks for the OsteoID link!
I will be sharing it with my true crime book club on Saturday.

 

[RandomName479]

Apparently the defense has an expert who is going to say there are no fractures in the nasal bones and the hyoid fracture is common in people over 40 because the cartilage ossifies or something like that.
Diane said she is one of 1 of only 100 board certified forensic anthropologists.

I looked her up and was reminded she testified for the prosecution in the Mollie Tibbetts trial. Her website says she was involved in the original description and analysis of the *advertiser censored* naledi remains. There are tons of links about it, here's one:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...iser censored*-naledi-human-evolution-science

She also has this cool website to ID bones

OsteoID Bone Identification

boneidentification.com

Thanks! I’m just watching today’s stream, and I am not super impressed with the state’s “forensic pathologist”. It’s like she thinks the more complicated words she uses, the smarter she sounds. In my experience, someone who is confident in what they’re speaking about and is a good witness is able to take a complicated topic and make it sound simple and understandable. I’m actually quite impressed with the prosecutor who is questioning her bc he seems to understand what the “layman” would be thinking and ask that question.

Diane totally took the wind out of her sails by challenging her being deemed as an expert witness.

I’m not even into the “meat” of any testimony, but I had to share my thoughts.

 

[megs1477]

Thanks! I’m just watching today’s stream, and I am not super impressed with the state’s “forensic pathologist”. It’s like she thinks the more complicated words she uses, the smarter she sounds. In my experience, someone who is confident in what they’re speaking about and is a good witness is able to take a complicated topic and make it sound simple and understandable. I’m actually quite impressed with the prosecutor who is questioning her bc he seems to understand what the “layman” would be thinking and ask that question.

Diane totally took the wind out of her sails by challenging her being deemed as an expert witness.

I’m not even into the “meat” of any testimony, but I had to share my thoughts.

She apparently has a terrible memory.

 

[SeesSeas]

Photos Show USB Cord That Was Around Emily Noble's Neck​

Aug 19, 2022

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[TenaciousTBacon]

Anyone watch the stream today? I've watched some after the lunch break when the defense started their case. The bearded prosecutor has really hit his stride questioning the anatomy professor. It's like watching a tennis match, with each of them slamming it back to the other.

 

[megs1477]

Anyone watch the stream today? I've watched some after the lunch break when the defense started their case. The bearded prosecutor has really hit his stride questioning the anatomy professor. It's like watching a tennis match, with each of them slamming it back to the other.

I’m watching it now and I agree. He doesn’t come off as aggressive as the Defense does. Yesterday, I felt bad for the expert. She would make a great police interrogator.

 

[geevee]

Defense made such a good argument for dismissal at the end of the day, I'm still teetering on the fence - yes he is the likely suspect and I believe she was killed rather than committed suicide, but also yes that there is no evidence tying him to her body in the woods. I'd be surprised if the judge granted the motion but DM was very convincing.

The jury has asked such thoughtful questions, they're really paying attention and thinking everything through.

 

[RandomName479]

I just finished watching the live stream from the 24th. A few of my observations…..in no particular order

I need to learn the prosecution team names - the male prosecutor who cross examined the board certified pathologist did an excellent job. Did anyone else notice he started to question the witness like the defense lawyer does? “You would agree with me that…..?”, “blah, blah, blah……correct?” - maybe it’s just how the cross examination goes, but I definitely saw a very similar style.

Re: state’s expert….IMO I would have an extremely hard time saying something “couldn’t happen” with extreme certainty. Science isn’t like that. The MOST you should be able to say with certainty is that “in my experience that isn’t something I have seen” and “Although theoretically possible, I could find no documented instances where this kind of injury actually occurred”

The jury is asking extremely thoughtful and insightful questions. Seriously impressed.

The female prosecutor is not their best presenter. I hate to feed into the “hysterical female” trope, but She comes across as really emotional, less than logical (like I too do not understand the significance of the flashlight and extension cord) and actually had crazy eyes for a while. Luckily for the prosecution, most (if not all) of this behaviour has been out of the presence of the jury. She didn’t present the most convincing argument that they have enough evidence. “I don’t want to give away my whole closing argument”???? If the judge rules against you, you won’t get a closing argument. I am impressed with the judge’s patience with her.

Following that, I believe the defense actually made a pretty solid argument for dismissal. (Or whatever rule 29 is).

I will admit to having a girl crush on Diane (the defense attorney). I’m sitting here watching the female prosecutor discount the neighbour’s 9am sighting on the 25th (he said he wasn’t sure if it was the 25th or 24th - he never “recanted”) but then use his statements re: fighting and smoking. I’m almost yelling at my screen “double standard - you can’t pick and choose when you want to believe him”……and then the defense actually calls her on it. I know some see her as aggressive, but IMO she is passionate and confident. I have definitely caught a few of her mix up with dates, but overall she seems extremely capable. Like I would want her defending me if I was ever on trial.

The judge is brilliant. Patient and logical. He seems to be “no BS” but also wants everything to be fair. When the female prosecutor was having her melt-down he ordered a break and told her to take all the time she needed. But he also called out her “The first thing out of MM’s
Mouth was that he didn’t do it”…..umm….you put him in the back of a police cruiser and took him to an interrogation room……I don’t see that statement as incriminating.

I have a fairly busy day at work but I’m going to try to catch this am live. I have never seen a case dismissed so I doubt this will be the case, but as much as MM gives me the creeps, I don’t see enough evidence for a murder conviction.

 

[Gardenista]

I'm now entirely on the NG side.

1. Her records clearly show she was depressed.

2. John Kramer saw her that morning. I know he recanted, but he testified it was either that morning or the morning before. Emily's cell records showed she was out of town, and there is photo evidence, so it could not be the day before

3. The day she went missing, Moore told the police her favorite spots to find her plants. They would have found her that day if they had actually put in any effort to find her. Why would Moore give LE info on that particular spot if the evening before he had staged a fake suicide after strangling and beating her to death? If they found her, he would have been arrested on the spot.

4. I wish Diane would have brought in an MD who could testify to the crazy side effect of Ambien. I think that's what all of the manic phone activity was after he went to pee. Diane does have an internal medicine doctor on her witness list, so maybe she'll call her today.

5. All of the stories that he didn't search for her were lies. The Det Grubbs agreed and said the name of the guy who went searching with him, but Diane had to drag it out of him. There also is a photo in evidence of a note he left for someone saying he was out searching. That photo was taken after a surprise visit to his house, so the note wasn't staged. The guy who went to search with him is on the witness list.

Like Diane said today, there was no charge for tampering with evidence or abuse of a corpse which is very telling. These prosecutors should be ashamed of what they did to this man. If the judge throws it out today, I hope it's with prejudice to really stick it to the prosecutors. If he doesn't, I certainly hope the jury acquits him.

And yes, Diane is a force to be reckoned with. Watch the Dr. Husel trial if you haven't. It's a long trial, but well worth watching to see Diane and Jose Baez go ham on unscrupulous prosecutors, hospital administrators and various other liars (including family members, one who actually tampered with evidence on the stand in front of everybody.) Husel originally was charged with 25 murders of his patients - 13 charges were dropped and he was tried on 12 of them. He was found NG.

Obviously something is very, very wrong in Ohio in terms of prosecutorial overreach.

 

[geevee]

I'm a little disappointed in the judge's decision on the Rule 29 motion but holy cow, the male prosecutor's behavior - so childish and unprofessional! I've sort of grown used to the emotional and angry delivery of the female prosecutor but the male was so out of line.

I'm on board with the above two posts, it was unlikely the judge would dismiss the charges but I think he should have, the state has only stacked inferences in lieu of any evidence it was this person who committed the murder.

I can see why the state has advanced no theory on when and how, if it's the 3 1/2 hour window the night of the 24th, how did he leave no evidence in the condo, or get her to the woods in the dark and stage that scene? If it was the next day, how did he manage getting her out of the condo and into the woods without being seen by anyone? They can't do it - they just leave it to the jury that 'he must have because she was there'. Please.

Luckily we have a jury that has critical thinking and reasoning skills (based on their questions), I hope that goes in favor of the defense.

Oh, and yes, I want to hear about Ambien-like drugs and their effect, it may explain his behavior all night being on his cell.

 

[GoJacks]

I wouldn't be surprised if found not guilty based on what was presented. Not saying I agree with that sentiment though.

Edit to say
Also, his defense attorneys are damn good.

 

[BUF]

I have to say that I have not been convinced that the prosecution has proved their case. While watching the judge’s decision on the motion for acquittal, at points I thought he was going to grant it, but ultimately denied it. I was extremely shocked at the prosecutor’s behavior walking out of the courtroom today when the judge was about to explain his decision.

I agree that his attorney is a force to be reckoned with…also watched her in Dr. Husel’s trial and was totally impressed with her. Ohio’s prosecution does seem to overeach as shown recently in these two trials. jmo

 

[megs1477]

Regarding Rule 29, all three parties agreed that there was sufficient evidence that the case was a homicide not a suicide. The Judge was basically ruling, was there any evidence that, when viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, would suggest he is guilty. Most of Diane's arguments, while very persuasive to a jury, were not sufficient to argue against the Rule 29 ruling. Witness credibility, expert opinions, etc. are something to be weighed by the jury, not the judge in the ruling.

 

[megs1477]

One more point I wanted to bring up regarding the prosecution of MM with seeming no real evidence...it is possible there is evidence that was not admissible. For example, EN could have told someone MM told her verbally he was going to kill her and make it look like a suicide. If she verbally relayed that to someone, it is hearsay and not admissible. Personally, I feel like there was more to the story that we are not hearing that made them charge MM so long after the fact. Prosecutors like convictions and this case is just a bunch of speculation. It seems like career suicide to proceed in such a high profile case without something more substantial. Making me think, they had something and it was disallowed before trial.

 

[Gardenista]

One more point I wanted to bring up regarding the prosecution of MM with seeming no real evidence...it is possible there is evidence that was not admissible. For example, EN could have told someone MM told her verbally he was going to kill her and make it look like a suicide. If she verbally relayed that to someone, it is hearsay and not admissible. Personally, I feel like there was more to the story that we are not hearing that made them charge MM so long after the fact. Prosecutors like convictions and this case is just a bunch of speculation. It seems like career suicide to proceed in such a high profile case without something more substantial. Making me think, they had something and it was disallowed before trial.

They were waiting for the autopsy to be completed. The forensic anthropologist's report came in on 1/21/21. Once they got that they had to find somebody who would tell the story they wanted to tell which turned out to be Dr. Smock. His report came on on 5/27/21. Then they had to get the GJ to indict Matt the ham sandwich in between that date and the date he was arrested which was 6/17/21.