trial thread: 3/16/2012

[matou]

‏ @RaffertyLFP
After reviewing her statement of May 24McClinitic stands by her earlier testimony that she used the hammer on Victoria and kicked her

 

[flipflop]

She reaffirms she was the one who kicked Tori and hit her with a hammer. Another legal issue has come up. The jury is excused.

 

[Sailor Bug]

After reviewing her statement of May 24McClinitic stands by her earlier testimony that she used the hammer on Victoria and kicked her

Jury is excused while the court considers a legal matter

 

[~n/t~]

But she didn't take the fall for him initially. She told them that MR did the killing. Why change her story after she knows that it won't make any difference in his sentencing if he's convicted? All the Crown needs is proof that he was aware Tori had been abducted. As was said in the opening statements, it shouldn't matter who did what. There's no benefit for him to changing her story now.

How can they possibly prove who actually killed Tori? No hammer with fingerprints. Just TLM's word and no witnesses.

JMO

I guess we'll have to wait and see what evidence they have against Rafferty. We haven't gotten there yet. Chapter 6 IIRC.

 

[nettie_82]

She reaffirms she was the one who kicked Tori and hit her with a hammer. Another legal issue has come up. The jury is excused.

Wow...what now.

 

[flipflop]

Before they left, Heeney told the jury they must "feel like 12 yo-yos" and asked them to enjoy an extended coffee break.

 

[nursebeeme]

:coffeews::waiting:

 

[Wondergirl]

I can remember sitting for long, boring chunks of time during the **will not say her name...** trial in Florida while witnesses read thru past statements before testimony...

I think this may be what is going on.....

:moo:

BBM: So worried that Victoria Stafford will also go without "justice".

Thinking of her family this morning.

 

[Kamille]

‏ @RaffertyLFP
After reviewing her statement of May 24McClinitic stands by her earlier testimony that she used the hammer on Victoria and kicked her

So it was on May 24th when she changed her story? When she spoke with Smyth? I wonder who she spoke with on the 19th when she said it was MR? :waitasec:

MOO

 

[maxfactor]

But she didn't take the fall for him initially. She told them that MR did the killing. Why change her story after she knows that it won't make any difference in his sentencing if he's convicted? All the Crown needs is proof that he was aware Tori had been abducted. As was said in the opening statements, it shouldn't matter who did what. There's no benefit for him to changing her story now.

How can they possibly prove who actually killed Tori? No hammer with fingerprints. Just TLM's word and no witnesses.

JMO

Maybe she still thinks if she takes the fall for him he will actually apply for conjugal visits with her.

 

[flipflop]

He also asked them not to speculate about the legal issues the two sides are discussing. No more tweets until the jury returns.

 

[matou]

So it was on May 24th when she changed her story? When she spoke with Smyth? I wonder who she spoke with on the 19th when she said it was MR? :waitasec:

MOO

I think this is saying her statement to Smyth was on May 24th (I don't remember us knowing that info). That May 24th statement would consist of her claiming MR killed Tori with the hammer and kicked her. JMO

 

[maxfactor]

So it was on May 24th when she changed her story? When she spoke with Smyth? I wonder who she spoke with on the 19th when she said it was MR? :waitasec:

MOO

My impression from all of this is that she changed her story after that interview with Jim Smyth. MOO

 

[Sailor Bug]

BBM: So worried that Victoria Stafford will also go without "justice".

Thinking of her family this morning.

bbm

I really am too

She said that her testimony from this week still stands: that she kicked #ToriStafford and killed her

 

[~n/t~]

Maybe she still thinks if she takes the fall for him he will actually apply for conjugal visits with her.

Bingo!

 

[maxfactor]

BBM: So worried that Victoria Stafford will also go without "justice".

Thinking of her family this morning.

I'm confidant they will have enough evidence to convince the jury MR took part in all of this but I don't think anyone but them will ever know what really happened that day.

 

[Sailor Bug]

My impression from all of this is that she changed her story after that interview with Jim Smyth. MOO

Very interesting article about Det Jim Smyth


http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/1...-interrogation-techniques-derail-murder-case/

 

[nursebeeme]

the other thing I have noticed is that we cannot hear what objections are being made and what they are about...

seems like this is going to be what all the sidebars are like.....


:gasp:

 

[Oldsoul2]

IMO I think it's because her credibility is a major issue and since she changed her story already,by asking her to review her testimony to make sure this is what the truth is, they are letting the jury see that this testimony is in fact what happened and she is not under distress this time.

 

[nonfictionrocks]

So it was on May 24th when she changed her story? When she spoke with Smyth? I wonder who she spoke with on the 19th when she said it was MR? :waitasec:

MOO

Maybe the Crown is being extra careful because this statement is the one with Det Smyth and we are aware of the recent trouble with his interviewing style:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11/25/youre-guilty-now-confess-false-admissions-put-polices-favourite-interrogation-tactic-under-scrutiny/