trial thread: 3/16/2012

[matou]

@RaffertyLFP
Jury may be called back to find out their schedule for next week, Normally court would resume Tuesday

 

[nonfictionrocks]

Big thanks to everyone posting the tweets today.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

I see that next chapter is video surveillance/bank records evidence, also visit to Mount Forest.

Will Derstine not cross-examine?

 

[nursebeeme]

I see that next chapter is video surveillance/bank records evidence, also visit to Mount Forest.

Will Derstine not cross-examine?

I don't think the crown is done with her yet?

I am sure the defense will want to cross moo

 

[nonfictionrocks]

I see that next chapter is video surveillance/bank records evidence, also visit to Mount Forest.

Will Derstine not cross-examine?

I strongly suspect he will.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

Also, the statement she gave on May 24th, is that the statement the crown was going off of when they started questioning her, or is she perjuring (sp) herself? A bit confused now.

 

[nursebeeme]

jmhoo: but I think the crown is trying to make it appear like she would cover for him/lie for him (inconsistent statements) but then they will come back around with evidence most likely to corroborate them both being there (including forensics)

just my two cents at this point :twocents: and is subject to change as this progresses. I must admit that I am still gobsmacked over TLM's testimony and what she claims to have done to Tori

moo

 

[~n/t~]

Justice Heeney said the court will discuss legal issues on Tuesday so the jury will be called back on Wednesday [via Twitter]
3:24

RaffertyLFP: But Heeney said the videotape can be used by jurors to evaluate McClintic's credibility as a witness [via Twitter]
3:23

RaffertyLFP: Heeney says the videotape is not evidence at this trial Her testimony in the trial saying she killed Tori is evidence [via Twitter]
3:21

RaffertyLFP: Jury back in. Justice Heeney instructs them about McClintic's video statements which contradicts earlier testimony [via Twitter]


ETA: Why is the video not evidence? I'm confused

 

[matou]

@AM980_Court
Justice Heeney telling the jury how to handle "prior inconsistent statements".

@AM980_Court
He notes McClintic has confirmed her original testimony today, despite the video statements.

@AM980_Court
Since McClintic didn't adopt her May police statements, jury can't consider them in deciding if Rafferty is guilty.

‏ @AM980_Court
They can use the statements to determine her credibility.

@AM980_Court
Now scheduling talk. Heeney had considered a jury half day on Tuesday, but figures a Wednesday return makes more sense.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

Justice Thomas Heeney is now instructing the jury on inconsistent statements. He says the jury cannot use statements made by McClintic on May 24, 2009 to decide the current case because at trial she has maintained that it was her who hit Tori Stafford with a hammer. However, they can use those statements to determine the credibility of McClintic as a witness.

Heeney tells the jury the court needs to examine more legal arguments and will not be needed until Wednesday at 10 a.m. He reminds the jury that they have only heard Crown evidence and the case is far from over. "Your job is to keep a completely open mind" until beginning deliberations, he tells the jurors.

by Jon Hembrey edited by Jon Hembrey 3:27 PM

 

[matou]

@CityCynthia
#rafferty - Judge tells jury they can only consider evidence she gave on witness stand - this week McClintic told court she killed Tori

 

[matou]

@RaffertyLFP
Heeney says the videotape is not evidence at this trial Her testimony in the trial saying she killed Tori is evidence

 

[~n/t~]

RaffertyLFP: Court adjourned until Tuesday Jury back Wednesday McClintic will likely continue testimony [via Twitter]

 

[matou]

@AdrianMorrow
The judge brought the jury back to tell them that the video is not evidence, that they have to rely on what she said in the witness box

 

[Flowercb]

Not true love with McClintic's man after all



http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/03/14/not-true-love-with-mcclintics-man-afterall

Sounds like this reporter is saying that TLM is now taking the fall for Rafferty and following through on her promise. But if it is true that she is taking the blame for him, why would she protect him--only TLM knows.:moo::jail:

 

[nursebeeme]

so we are out until wednesday (tweet coverage that is... ) correct?

 

[matou]

so we are out until wednesday (tweet coverage that is... ) correct?

Yes, that's it until Wednesday, sigh...

 

[JayFriend]

Justice Thomas Heeney is now instructing the jury on inconsistent statements. He says the jury cannot use statements made by McClintic on May 24, 2009 to decide the current case because at trial she has maintained that it was her who hit Tori Stafford with a hammer. However, they can use those statements to determine the credibility of McClintic as a witness.

Makes sense. In this trial, TLM is testifying under oath. In police interviews, neither side is obligated to tell the truth and often don't.

 

[Flowercb]

Why would she do that? A little late now. The first statement she gave, she implicated him as the murderer. She then told LE that MR sexually assaulted Tori. She should by then have been aware that no matter who actually killed her, they would both be legally charged with 1st degree murder. Changing her story would not benefit MR and she'd know this. There is no reason for her to lie a second time about who did the killing. Anyway, the Crown has obviously accepted her second story. It would be in her ASoF. The judge is making sure all the T-s are crossed and the I-s dotted.

JMO

I don't think TLM knew that he would be charged for murder anyway, not smart enough--unless someone told her the legalities of the situation.

If she did do it though, I believe she was instructed.:moo::jail:

 

[nursebeeme]

since testimony is done until next wednesday we can move on over to the general discussion thread for the long weekend in a bit:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7692076#post7692076"]jury is out until tuesday 21 March: general discussion thread - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]