Sidney Moorer pretrial hearing - 18 April 2016

[yupikgirl]

TM was very conscious of being recorded I think. She wouldn't even turn to speak to her kids. And when she decided to leave she left very very quickly.

That was boring IMO. Wish we could have heard the rest that they didn't get to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[meinmyrtlebeach]

Suffice it to say that we WILL hear it now...now that the judge has allowed his testimony. My guess is that since he says he was able to identify it as being THEIR exact truck, that it's pretty damning. Otherwise, why would the defense care if his testimony was allowed or not? So much for the defense's theory or comment prior that it was nothing more than a "black blob"!

 

[panacea]

The reason for my post about TM and the way she looks is her online person doesn't match the real one. SM looks the same as always.

It doesn't match much at all. Photoshop works wonders.

 

[byo]

WPDE ABC15 ‏@wpdeabc15 8m8 minutes ago
Judge says Fredericks testimony will be allowed. Hearing is over. Look for a full recap tonight!

 

[stillwatersc]

It seems like the judge is lecturing Truslow at this point that Truslow's opinion of the states expert is wrong. That he agrees with and accepts the methods used to come to his conclusions.

Ill prepared attorney's really seem to irritate Judge Dennis and he seems to enjoy letting them know it. :facepalm: Thanks everyone for the updates.

 

[magnolia]

And the hearing is over. Judge Dennis said they will schedule another date to hear other motions that were not gotten to today.
Brad via 2 minutes ago


Judge Dennis said he will allow the testimony from the state's expert witness. The trial is currently scheduled for June.
Bradvia·2 minutes ago

I guess the date to hear the other motions will be weeks away. :gaah:

 

[jillycat]

Can't wait to see what happens with the motion re: the BW testimony.

 

[JerseyGirl]

I guess the date to hear the other motions will be weeks away. :gaah:

They should get all the pre-trial motions done before May 2nd (two weeks away), which is when the jury summons and questionnaires will be sent out.

 

[LBDunes]

I watched the entire hearing so far. In my opinion, the state's expert is head and shoulders above the defense's when it comes to experience, knowledge, and integrity. It wasn't even close it would seem to me. My only wish is that it were the actual trial with a jury sitting there, because I have to think that if/when a jury hears those two that the defenses opinions won't hold much weight with them.

I also thought the prosecutor did a great job and seems prepared, where SM's attorney seemed to fumble quite a bit with his questions when he was crossing such an expert witness that the state presented.

BBM - Here's a recap of the 'battle of the experts'.

http://wpde.com/news/local/pre-trial-hearing-for-sidney-moorer-to-take-place-monday-morning

* Bruce Koenig testified that he agreed with the work that Fredericks did, but did not agree to the conclusion that he made that the truck was the same as the one that belonged to the Moorers.

* Dennis ruled that Fredericks would be allowed to render an opinion as an expert, but Truslow also questioned the nature and content that would be permitted as part Fredericks' expert testimony.

* Denis said the exact nature of what the two expert witnesses can testify to will be decided by objections during trial.

So, I guess at trial it will be who is the more credible expert witness on the video testimony. Koenig agreed to the work, but didn't agree with the fact it was the truck that belonged to the Moorers? Well logically that is true, but don't you have to take into account the other evidence and the proximity of the truck that time of night? Also, they did not rush to ID the truck. Weren't there some 30 or 50 other vehicles of that exact model investigated/inspected before the arrest?

Some other thoughts: It was pretty interesting when the solicitor asked about the other case Fredericks was involved in for the defense in SC. She asked him the name of the atty and then asked who was the prosecutor and he said I believe that was you. That seemed to give weight to his credibility, being that he testified for both sides of the justice system.

I was also relieved that this time, as opposed to last time, (in the bond recon. hearing), that the judge let the solicitor make the case w/o interrupting her numerous times.

 

[Surfside]

I have been busy today and was just now able to hop on to see what I missed. I want to thank y'all for the time you spent watching the video feed, following the tweets, and making such thoughtful posts. I hated having to miss this, but thanks to y'all I feel like I didn't miss a thing.

:gthanks:

 

[U2forever]

Yes, you can tell by the hair extensions!

(apologies for the petty and superficial comment. I'm letting TM's overuse of photoshopping get to me. Nice to see the real deal)

Hoosgirl, hair extensions, I was going to comment on them but you beat me to it. I can spot em a mile away. ✂️

 

[spiritseeker31]

Has someone posted the trial yet? I skimmed but didn't see it - arrived late to the party

[video=youtube;W0rI0C9oSZU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0rI0C9oSZU[/video]
Part 1 - you'll see 2 and 3 on there.

 

[Madeleine74]

Totality of circumstances is compelling. Especially the fact that LE checked every other Ford truck in that area that have the same matching characteristics as Sydney Moorer's truck. That belies the rush to judgment typical defense posture since other trucks were in fact examined.

 

[brandalous]

I have been busy today and was just now able to hop on to see what I missed. I want to thank y'all for the time you spent watching the video feed, following the tweets, and making such thoughtful posts. I hated having to miss this, but thanks to y'all I feel like I didn't miss a thing.

Agreed, thanks all! I am sick and slept through the livefeed. Glad the state's expert witness wasn't tossed.

Has someone posted the trial yet? I skimmed but didn't see it - arrived late to the party

<snipped youtube link>
Part 1 - you'll see 2 and 3 on there.

Many thanks! I was going to ask for this so you saved me some time!

 

[magnolia]

BBM - Here's a recap of the 'battle of the experts'.

http://wpde.com/news/local/pre-trial-hearing-for-sidney-moorer-to-take-place-monday-morning

* Bruce Koenig testified that he agreed with the work that Fredericks did, but did not agree to the conclusion that he made that the truck was the same as the one that belonged to the Moorers.

* Dennis ruled that Fredericks would be allowed to render an opinion as an expert, but Truslow also questioned the nature and content that would be permitted as part Fredericks' expert testimony.

* Denis said the exact nature of what the two expert witnesses can testify to will be decided by objections during trial.

So, I guess at trial it will be who is the more credible expert witness on the video testimony. Koenig agreed to the work, but didn't agree with the fact it was the truck that belonged to the Moorers? Well logically that is true, but don't you have to take into account the other evidence and the proximity of the truck that time of night? Also, they did not rush to ID the truck. Weren't there some 30 or 50 other vehicles of that exact model investigated/inspected before the arrest?

Some other thoughts: It was pretty interesting when the solicitor asked about the other case Fredericks was involved in for the defense in SC. She asked him the name of the atty and then asked who was the prosecutor and he said I believe that was you. That seemed to give weight to his credibility, being that he testified for both sides of the justice system.

I was also relieved that this time, as opposed to last time, (in the bond recon. hearing), that the judge let the solicitor make the case w/o interrupting her numerous times.

BBM

Right now, I am leaning towards agreeing with Koenig's opinion. When something is deemed to be unique, it needs to have something more than the same class and characteristic. However, as you stated, I take into account the other evidence, the proximity of the truck, and the time factor. It would be too big of a coincidence for a different truck with the same class and characteristic to be riding that particular road at that hour. The truck came from the direction of the M's and went back that way.

 

[Hoosgirl]

I had to hop off the feed cause of work, so apologies for asking without watching. Did Fredericks address how he was able to say the headlights were unique? I agree that is a bold statement. And it sounds like SM's truck was tested after it had been sold to another owner upstate?

 

[Surfside]

Was SM crying? Did anybody see this on the live feed?

 

[Hoosgirl]

Found this, very helpful to understand the headlight issue:

<modsnip>

Images of objects ranging from vehicle bumper stickers to shoe print patterns can be analyzed with this method, but in this case the headlight pattern of the truck in the security video was the target of much of the analysis &#8212; and the main subject of the motion by the Moorers&#8217; attorneys.

<snip>

Koenig complimented Fredericks&#8217; report regarding the security video footage, but he did take issue with a claim made in the report.

According to Truslow, the report included as part of its justification that &#8220;no two vehicles share the same headlight pattern.&#8221; Truslow asked Koenig whether that could be proven.

Koenig pointed out that currently there are no peer-reviewed studies that prove that vehicle headlights have fingerprint-like uniqueness.

In fact, according to Koenig, the technique known as &#8220;vehicle headlight spread analysis&#8221; can only conclusively determine the class of vehicles &#8212; make, model, and year &#8212; not the specific vehicle. To determine a specific vehicle, Koenig said, requires other identifying features like dents.

http://www.myhorrynews.com/article_...l&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=user-share

 

[brandalous]

Was SM crying? Did anybody see this on the live feed?

View attachment 92113

Looks to me like they both are--her mascara looks to be running. I think they sincerely thought the charges would be dropped today. There was one article last week about the filed motions that said something to the effect that the motions would be heard at the next hearing if there is need for another, which I took to be implying that there wouldn't be a hearing because there wouldn't be a trial. I'm not an expert on anything by any means, but that's how I read it.

 

[bestill]

From My Horry News...http://www.myhorrynews.com/article_...l&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=user-share