GUILTY SC - Christine Parcell 41, fatally stabbed by concert pianist, Greenville, 13 Oct 2021 *Arrest*

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Regarding the defence claim that ZH killed CP in the attempt to 'defend a minor', are we to suppose that ZH imagined the child was being held captive in the home? Or had he become obsessed with that idea or misinformed? Is this defence perhaps suggesting that ZH was under the strong urge of a compulsive or obsessive idea or even suffering from delusion or mania? Has there been any introduction of the idea of a mental health problem?

Surely no defence in the world can argue vigilante action as a justification for a killing when there were / are other courses of action available?

JMO MOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Cathy Russon reposted

@PrettyLiesAlibi


Again, the judge isn't allowing #ZacharyHughes to bring the child abuse in for his defense and reasoning for killing #ChristinaParcell - to protect her from her mother and Bradley Post.


2:41 PM · Feb 18, 2025

I'm confused... what are the jury supposed to make of an idea that ZH was defending / protecting a child from her own mother and BP if they are not being informed there was any alleged abuse?

What are the jury going to suppose happened? That ZH was somehow violently deranged -or- draw their own conclusions that something horrific was being perpetrated against the child.

How can ZH have a fair trial if the jury are not furnished with at least cursory information about the abuse allegations?

 

[CHEL]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891940021214527965

 

[Cedars]

So will ZH plead guilty now?

I guess the defense is trying to make the case that he's not guilty by reason of self defense - in fact, the charges should be dismissed, due to the 'stand your ground' law in NC.

However: For this law to apply, various conditions need to be met.

1. the person needs to be in their own home, workplace or vehicle.
2. They need to be in imminent danger from an attacker.
3. Defense claims he was acting on behalf of a minor, but, as the judge points out, the child was not in imminent danger either - was not actually present.

In fact, if the victim Christine had been able to get a weapon and kill him, she would have escaped prosecution because of stand your ground law. She would have been defending herself from the home invader ZH, who had a weapon and was intent on killing her.

https://www.ncsl.org/civil-and-criminal-justice/self-defense-and-stand-your-ground

 

[arielilane]

@IndyJenn_


The jury was brought back in briefly. The judge explained today was an unusual day due to legal issues before dismissing the jurors for the day.


3:00 PM · Feb 18, 2025

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891940779636961763

 

[Cedars]

Has there been any introduction of the idea of a mental health problem?

JMO MOO

Perhaps that will be the next line of defense. However, the presence of cocaine at the scene suggests ZH was voluntarily consuming, and that doesn't count as mental health problems... though - speculating - it may explain a lot of how JM had power over someone.

JMO

 

[Cedars]

I'm confused... what are the jury supposed to make of an idea that ZH was defending / protecting a child from her own mother and BP if they are not being informed there was any alleged abuse?

What are the jury going to suppose happened? That ZH was somehow violently deranged -or- draw their own conclusions that something horrific was being perpetrated against the child.

How can ZH have a fair trial if the jury are not furnished with at least cursory information about the abuse allegations?

Motive is not a factor in considering whether someone is, or is not, guilty of homicide. The prosecution/defense like to provide motive, because it helps make sense of the facts, but it is the physical evidence that is relevant.

Is there sufficient physical evidence that the defendent killed this other person, beyond a reasonable doubt: yes or no.

Someone can claim their spouse was cheating on them, so they killed them. The jury don't get involved in trying to decide whether or not the spouse truly was cheating, or whether that's a good enough reason, or whether the accused was cheating too, etc.

It doesn't matter, there is no excuse for murder, except, in NC, immediate self-defense from attack while in your own home, vehicle or workplace.

JMO

 

[Lusitana]

This case doesn't make any sense. Has it been confirmed that the CSAM that Post had in his possession was actually of Parcell's daughter? And then, how would ZH even knew about the existence of said material depicting the child? Did he knew Post? None of this makes any sense, Parcell and Melo both had custody of the child, correct? The kid was not being held hostage at Parcell's home.

It really rubs me the wrong way that there are two accusations of CSAM being produced depicting Melo's child, but then, when investigated nobody is able to find said material or evidence that any abuse happened? First they alleged that Post had it, then it was Parcell's sister that took pictures of her getting out of the shower... Smells fishy to me. In my opinion, Melo is manipulating everyone, including ZH.

Can anyone please let me know if it was ever confirmed that Post ACTUALLY had CSAM of Parcell and Melo's daughter? TIA.

 

[Cedars]

Can anyone please let me know if it was ever confirmed that Post ACTUALLY had CSAM of Parcell and Melo's daughter? TIA.

I can't imagine it (being confirmed), law enforcement can never, ever, release anything about the names of victims of such abuse.

I also doubt they can even deny it. To put LE in the position of denying it, ie presenting an expert to state there were no such images found - that would require making allegations in court that there are such images. And court will not allow someone to directly allege a particular child was a victim of CP.

Besides, it's impossible to prove something did not happen.

Defense is wiggling around this by claiming they have all this evidence on hard drives, etc. I wish there was some way to call their bluff, and force them to bring it to court and have it independently examined - but, of course, that could never, ever happen. A minor cannot be allowed to even have a whisper of such an allegation made in court, it could ruin their life.

IMO, this is like Odinism in the Delphi trial. The defense is manipulating their ability to file court documents, and the eagerness of the media to publish them. Defense is trying to plant confusion in the mind of at least one juror, to get a mistrial. I doubt they could get all the jurors to agree to flout the legal statutes.

However, perhaps it will be enough to satisfy ZH's family, since he'll need them to visit him in prison.

JMO

 

[arielilane]

@IndyJenn_


Judge Fant is advising Zachary Hughes of his fifth amendment right. Hughes tells the judge he has decided to testify.



4:13 PM · Feb 18, 2025

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891959153251242271

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Motive is not a factor in considering whether someone is, or is not, guilty of homicide. The prosecution/defense like to provide motive, because it helps make sense of the facts, but it is the physical evidence that is relevant.

Is there sufficient physical evidence that the defendent killed this other person, beyond a reasonable doubt: yes or no.

Someone can claim their spouse was cheating on them, so they killed them. The jury don't get involved in trying to decide whether or not the spouse truly was cheating, or whether that's a good enough reason, or whether the accused was cheating too, etc.

It doesn't matter, there is no excuse for murder, except, in NC, immediate self-defense from attack while in your own home, vehicle or workplace.

JMO

Although I do agree, the motive or explanation could affect whether a person is legally culpable for their own actions in the first place. Then which type of murder or cause of death charge is brought. Then, if guilty, the sentencing. IMO.

I don't see how anyone could claim self-defence if they were in someone else's home but they could have gone to visit the person and then were attacked and violently defended self. 31 stab wounds sounds like overkill though, not defence. If we didn't have all this background info, on the surface I would wonder if ZH was in a secret or some sort of transactional relationship with CP, hence the roses, the drugs, the money etc. Anyways this whole story is far out. JMO

 

[arielilane]

Court is in recess until 9:30 am ET tomorrow.

 

[arielilane]

As we all know, the prosecutor has the burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Motive helps, but is not necessary. Is motive required in the state of SC?

For ex: in the state of TX, the prosecution does not have to show motive.

 

[arielilane]

@cathyrusson


I feel like his entire testimony will be, "I'm not allowed to say."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891962701917647242

 

[imstilla.grandma]

The defense will not be allowed to present their argument that Hughes was trying to protect Parcell’s daughter from abuse. However, defense attorney Mark Moyer hinted at the motive in his opening statement.

“Zack is going to testify, because Zack has been waiting for this opportunity to tell people, to tell a group of people like you, what really happened,” Moyer said. “Which is that he took the life of Christina Parcell, and crucially, he’s been waiting and wanting to tell you why.”

‘A just cause’: Defense admits suspect killed Upstate woman, argues it wasn’t murder

The defense team for murder suspect Zachary Hughes gave a shocking opening statement to their case on Tuesday: admitting he killed a Greer woman in 2021.

www.foxcarolina.com

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

If this child was genuinely being violated in the way suggested, is it possible ZH made contact with CP on the pretext of being interested in the child? Maybe he was acting as an undercover sleuth and trying to investigate and get evidence? Perhaps he went to the house believing the child was inside a room somewhere and desperate to locate and liberate her, an intense and violent confrontation broke out? JMO MOO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I am very confused as to how ZH is going to testify since the judge appropriately ruled he could not say he killed CP because he thought her daughter was being abused.
He’ll just confessing…period…I guess.

 

[Cedars]

I don't see how anyone could claim self-defence if they were in someone else's home but they could have gone to visit the person and then were attacked and violently defended self.

True, that doesn't seem to be allowable in SC.

I think the Vallow case is coming up in Arizona, that involved a visitor to a home who claimed self defense/protecting a minor (who corroborated) and so, wasn't charged.

I think that particular self defense claim went over better (altho likely a complete fabrication), because the person stayed on the scene, called emergency services, and gave a matter-of-fact explanation to police.

I think sprinkling rose petals, running away and hiding isn't a good start for a self-defense claim.

JMO

Edited to add: sorry, I confused the location as being NC, however SC is also a 'stand your ground' state

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Zachary Hughes needs to be found guilty of murder and sentenced accordingly. The messy part of this case will be sorted out soon enough, and no matter how that shakes out, ZH is a murderer.
You cannot legally condone killing someone because you think they did something wrong or someone told you they did something wrong.

 

[Cedars]

If this child was genuinely being violated in the way suggested, is it possible ZH made contact with CP on the pretext of being interested in the child? Maybe he was acting as an undercover sleuth and trying to investigate and get evidence? Perhaps he went to the house believing the child was inside a room somewhere and desperate to locate and liberate her, an intense and violent confrontation broke out? JMO MOO

IMO, the prosecution presented a credible motive that ZH was acting on behalf of his best friend JM, who wanted custody. I've followed too many murder-for-custody cases to discount that.

JMO