GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 Aug 2014 - Enrique Arochi kidnapping trial #5

[Orgona]

I think some of the confusion about DNA amounts comes from confusing the substances that carries the DNA with DNA. During the Caylee trials a scientist explained touch DNA and other sources of DNA. Per the scientist, touch DNA (skin sloughed off when you touch something) has to be replicated to produce enough of a chain to get a profile. There are DNA rules that apply to how much replication can be admitted into court.

DNA from bodily fluids produce plenty of DNA with long chains to get the profile of the person with no replication necessary. So, the DNA amount in fluids is way higher than in touch DNA. The reference to a pack of sugar was a reference to how much DNA was found when dealing with a microscopic organism. That was a lot of DNA chains as opposed to the partial DNA chain that would come from touch DNA.

I hate it when lawyers take advantage of people not being experts on a subject and try to fool them by lying by omission. Kind of like mechanics taking advantage of someone who is unfamiliar with the system on a vehicle.

Thanks for this post, I couldn't agree more.

The size of the DNA sample was normal, even more than it was needed to make a simple DNA profile from it. DNA is not visible to the naked eye. Of course it is just much much much smaller than a smallest grain in the pack of sugar. We can clearly still see the grain of sugar, can't we? This is absolutely a no brainer. I'm not being snarky, just genuinely surprised that some on a crime forum doesn't already know this. It was also clearly relayed by the experts that it was plenty enough and this wasn't rebutted by any defense expert. Why? Because this is a fact and is normal. DNA chain is always small. Otherwise let's throw out all the DNA evidence in all other trials in the history... This is not a pseudoscience.
It's like saying we can't get life threatening illness from a virus, bacteria of microbes because they are so extremely small that they are invisible to a naked eye, so the getting sick claim from it can't possibly be valid.

There is indeed a big difference between DNA and touch DNA. Touch DNA sample is even smaller than DNA and can be a result of a transfer deposit of skin cells. IIRC 7-8 cells are enough to produce touch DNA from. Touch DNA have to be replicated again and again to be able to produce a DNA profile from it as a result. With other words add even more zeros behind the 1: number representing the size of the regular size of a sample which can show DNA, and we will get the size of sample needed to get the touch DNA from.
This was a good enough size sample -even more than what is necessary to get a DNA profile from- as we heard the expert's testimony. This amount of DNA couldn't just be transference off of clothes or off whatever else. This amount of DNA could only be a result of CM physically being in his trunk at some point, one way or another.
Not to mention that according to EA's own statements to LE Christina was nowhere near of his car. According to EA his car was nowhere near to Christina's car either.

The cell ping evidence is also solid. The defense expert just conveniently "forgot" to add the portion of the data which is the most important part of it all. This was not an accident, this was an omission. I would go ahead and say it was lie by omission. He was talking about something completely different than what the state based his tracking on. This is how the defense again tried to muddy the water. It's understandable if people who are not really familiar with cellphone technology could be led into the woods with that testimony. But after that the prosecution on rebuttal recalled their expert, who clearly explained what the difference is and why the defense expert's testimony has nothing to do with what the state based their tracking on.

All IMHO

 

[Gigglingtoes]

Respectfully they "clearly" are. They do not have all 12 jurors agreeing on guilty or not guilty. They do not retry the case then vote. They have an initial vote. People who disagree say vote not guilty they discuss why they feel not guilty. And work from whatever point the differences in votes are. Some may change their vote along the discussion. They are at a deadlock though.

Clearly none of us know what is happening behind closed doors with the jury so why pretend we do lol

 

[LookingForClues]

Grr all these well meaning people posting stuff on #arochitrial is making hard to find media tweets lol

Valerie Wigglesworth Verified account  ‏@vlwigg · 4m4 minutes ago
.@XXXX Brother not necessarily an alibi. He wouldn't know what happened before Arochi got home #arochitrial

Just seeing this now...

I am not someone who has followed this case daily, but I do remember reading that EA said his brother could prove that EA went straight home and was there by 4:30 AM. If he was there by 4:30, there would have been no time for anything to happen between EA and CM.

Now, I cannot find where I read that (so many threads, so many news articles, etc., in the past 2 years). Does anyone else remember this and know where this information was provided?

TIA

 

[arkansasmimi]

That could happen, but there is the phone pings and the underover cop eye witness to where HF was. I know we didn't hear from the UC, but I wouldn't expect LE to expose an UC. It takes months and sometimes years to get the UCs in a position of trust. And since HF was sent to prision, I have no reason to doubt the States explanation as to why they dropped him as a POI. EA on the other hand acted in such a way to make him a POI and then the evidence sealed the deal for the investigators. I don't see any reason to think they cared about HF enough to cover for him in this situation. He was on their radar as a drug dealer and LE will pin anything on them they can to get a conviction and get them off the streets. IMO

Pros said that in closing arguments. Opening and closing statements are not evidence. Judge told us (jury) that. And just from "listening" to tweets, it appears that EA was the suspect from get go. HF came in but he also brought a lawyer with him AND HF had just that night prior sold first to the UC. SO right off the bat PPD knew HF was selling to Undercover Fed? All that sent to prison was after the fact of 7 or 8 sells. I don't know I just think in real life there more to this. JMHO

 

[Orgona]

That is why the DT puts on a defense and calls witnesses. To refute the Prosecutions claims. The State must prove guilt, but the defense's job is to provide exculpatory evidence to refute the States' evidence and just blowing smoke shows there is no exculpatory evidence and is in hopes there will be gullible jurors who will buy in to the smoke and mirrors and forget about the real evidence. There is no quest for truth anymore. It is now down to how can we confuse jurors to create any kind of doubt and sell it as reasonable.

This is so true in most of the cases I followed and it's so sad for the victims (and their families) of any crime. This is what the justice system lately has become. Smoke and mirrors and creating confusion which has nothing to do with reality...

IMO

 

[arkansasmimi]

[video=twitter;778699484842733568]https://twitter.com/jobinpnews/status/778699484842733568[/video]

 

[bellesnwhistles]

Every time I see a new tweet I get so excited for a verdict haha. 14 hours! Bless them. I know this isn't easy.

 

[suzyjackson]

Just seeing this now...

I am not someone who has followed this case daily, but I do remember reading that EA said his brother could prove that EA went straight home and was there by 4:30 AM. If he was there by 4:30, there would have been no time for anything to happen between EA and CM.

Now, I cannot find where I read that (so many threads, so many news articles, etc., in the past 2 years). Does anyone else remember this and know where this information was provided?

TIA

http://starlocalmedia.com/allenamer...cle_14dd4862-9de4-11e4-b48e-5765cf2b7e65.html


"Arochi said when he returned home he found his brother, Carlos, passed out on the couch so he woke him up and told him to go to bed. His parents were out of town." from his interview with Det Stamm on 9/3 and 9/4.No time specified though

 

[arkansasmimi]

Thanks for this post, I couldn't agree more.

The size of the DNA sample was normal, even more than it was needed to make a simple DNA profile from it. DNA is not visible to the naked eye. Of course it is just much much much smaller than a smallest grain in the pack of sugar. We can clearly still see the grain of sugar, can't we? This is absolutely a no brainer. I'm not being snarky, just genuinely surprised that some on a crime forum doesn't already know this. It was also clearly relayed by the experts that it was plenty enough and this wasn't rebutted by any defense expert. Why? Because this is a fact and is normal. DNA chain is always small. Otherwise let's throw out all the DNA evidence in all other trials in the history... This is not a pseudoscience.
It's like saying we can't get life threatening illness from a virus, bacteria of microbes because they are so extremely small that they are invisible to a naked eye, so the getting sick claim from it can't possibly be valid.

There is indeed a big difference between DNA and touch DNA. Touch DNA sample is even smaller than DNA and can be a result of a transfer deposit of skin cells. IIRC 7-8 cells are enough to produce touch DNA from. Touch DNA have to be replicated again and again to be able to produce a DNA profile from it as a result. With other words add even more zeros behind the 1: number representing the size of the regular size of a sample which can show DNA, and we will get the size of sample needed to get the touch DNA from.
This was a good enough size sample -even more than what is necessary to get a DNA profile from- as we heard the expert's testimony. This amount of DNA couldn't just be transference off of clothes or off whatever else. This amount of DNA could only be a result of CM physically being in his trunk at some point, one way or another.
Not to mention that according to EA's own statements to LE Christina was nowhere near of his car. According to EA his car was nowhere near to Christina's car either.

The cell ping evidence is also solid. The defense expert just conveniently "forgot" to add the portion of the data which is the most important part of it all. This was not an accident, this was an omission. I would go ahead and say it was lie by omission. He was talking about something completely different than what the state based his tracking on. This is how the defense again tried to muddy the water. It's understandable if people who are not really familiar with cellphone technology could be led into the woods with that testimony. But after that the prosecution on rebuttal recalled their expert, who clearly explained what the difference is and why the defense expert's testimony has nothing to do with what the state based their tracking on.

All IMHO

All this aside and I am a juror who does not follow trials or true crime or even watch CSI type shows. IF I am a juror who has been following along as witnesses and evidence is presented...then I will recognize that the Rebuttal Witness is also the same Witness that I heard agree to a Def on cross question of if EA could have been home when that data hit the cell tower (Benzick said yes it was possible) Everything else may have went over jurors head. JMHO

 

[arkansasmimi]

[video=twitter;778704419210702850]https://twitter.com/lpphillips/status/778704419210702850[/video]

 

[Hoosgirl]

While we're waiting, waiting, waiting ... I tried to post last night but couldn't get it to go through. I wanted to add my thanks to arkansasmimi, gigglingtoes, tcmom and all the others who spent so much time and effort bringing the tweets and inside courtroom perspective to the thread. It is much appreciated!

Still fingers crossed here for justice for Christina, her lovely family, and all the passionate posters.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by LookingForClues View Post

Just seeing this now...

I am not someone who has followed this case daily, but I do remember reading that EA said his brother could prove that EA went straight home and was there by 4:30 AM. If he was there by 4:30, there would have been no time for anything to happen between EA and CM.

Now, I cannot find where I read that (so many threads, so many news articles, etc., in the past 2 years). Does anyone else remember this and know where this information was provided?

TIA

http://starlocalmedia.com/allenamer...cle_14dd4862-9de4-11e4-b48e-5765cf2b7e65.html


"Arochi said when he returned home he found his brother, Carlos, passed out on the couch so he woke him up and told him to go to bed. His parents were out of town." from his interview with Det Stamm on 9/3 and 9/4.No time specified though

4:30 a.m. was also the time EA neighbor testified that EA asked her to look on her security camera. It didn't show but VW tweeted that the camera only showed 1/3 of EA family drive and he could have been parked in front. JMHO (just posting because I remembered that time of morning, IIRC and may be wrong but think it was one of the days he did interview with PPD that he asked neighbor that)

 

[b.humble]

Thanks, I was just going by testimony and may have misremembered on note, but Busby according to tweets PPD did weekly trash pulls. The receipts were found in the last trash pull were Dec 2014. (corrected my post from Nov)

Post#220
Natalie Solis ‏@Fox4Natalie 2m2 minutes ago McKinney, TX
Busby: in Dec trash pull frm Arochi house found receipts from wkd Morris went missing - incl Cartopia receipt from 9/3/14@FOX4 #arochitrial

** if this tweet is factual, it says AFTER EA was arrested, so someone besides EA threw them away, depending on the trash put out and arrest time whether it could have been him. IF he was already arrested, then he didn't throw away, he kept them. JMHO
Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 2m2 minutes ago
After arrest, Busby said she did one more trash run at Arochi hom and recovered receipts from 8/29/14-9/3/14 #arochitrial

Agree about thinking can get rid of phone records. Even deleting stuff. Just hoping that witness testimony didn't confuse jury as did me with conflicting testimony by PPD. Just stating my observations from first hearing evidence presented.

Edit to add: I respectfully disagree that just because he had not been arrested yet that he didn't need an attorney. He had been to PPD twice and interview and photos taken and so forth. He should have had one with him. Also can't remember date arrested on stolen phone and note found but I don't know if he spoke with an attorney or not but didn't throw away receipt til Dec 2014.

Please do not read any snark in this. I'm typing on phone and striving for brevity. This key pad is on my last nerve.

1-receipts in Dec. v. post it note in Sept. I understand you spoke about both, but I was only speaking to the post it note to help with date discrepancy. It probably would have been more helpful for me to state that.
2- This is the biggest clarification I want to make. I hope this was just misread or maybe a response to someone else, but I never said EA didn't need an attorney because he had not been arrested, only that he did not have an attorney at the time the post it note was found. I agree with you though, I 100% agree with you, albeit for different reasons, I assume: EA was undeniably in need of an attorney by 8/30.

 

[arkansasmimi]

While we're waiting, waiting, waiting ... I tried to post last night but couldn't get it to go through. I wanted to add my thanks to arkansasmimi, gigglingtoes, tcmom and all the others who spent so much time and effort bringing the tweets and inside courtroom perspective to the thread. It is much appreciated!

Still fingers crossed here for justice for Christina, her lovely family, and all the passionate posters.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Thank you for kind words. For my part your all most welcome. Its a group effort the way I see it. I (selfishly) like to have something to look back on and facts as much as possible. Not being live streamed it the best we could do. WS got wonky at times posting. LOL I figured out my own little system of trying to keep up sometimes depending on who on stand- there were lots lol. Sorry for the huge bunches at a time but best way I could get posted. lol Thankful it worked out. And thankful everyone was helping everyone. Thank you everyone for that too. :loveyou:

 

[Orgona]

All this aside and I am a juror who does not follow trials or true crime or even watch CSI type shows. IF I am a juror who has been following along as witnesses and evidence is presented...then I will recognize that the Rebuttal Witness is also the same Witness that I heard agree to a Def on cross question of if EA could have been home when that data hit the cell tower (Benzick said yes it was possible) Everything else may have went over jurors head. JMHO

If you are a Juror you heard much more than we red throughout the tweets. There always was a clarification in redirect. According to what I have read in the tweets, the state handled very well dubious questions in redirect.
The problem could be if some of the Jurors don't use their logical thinking and fells into the guilt trip the defense presented at closing. They used various dubious statements at closing too to confuse the Jury. If the Jury is smart and is capable of logical thinking they have enough evidence. I don't mind if they deliberate long. At least this way they will have no regret whatever they decide.

 

[b.humble]

Thanks for this post, I couldn't agree more.

The size of the DNA sample was normal, even more than it was needed to make a simple DNA profile from it. DNA is not visible to the naked eye. Of course it is just much much much smaller than a smallest grain in the pack of sugar. We can clearly still see the grain of sugar, can't we? This is absolutely a no brainer. I'm not being snarky, just genuinely surprised that some on a crime forum doesn't already know this. It was also clearly relayed by the experts that it was plenty enough and this wasn't rebutted by any defense expert. Why? Because this is a fact and is normal. DNA chain is always small. Otherwise let's throw out all the DNA evidence in all other trials in the history... This is not a pseudoscience.
It's like saying we can't get life threatening illness from a virus, bacteria of microbes because they are so extremely small that they are invisible to a naked eye, so the getting sick claim from it can't possibly be valid.

There is indeed a big difference between DNA and touch DNA. Touch DNA sample is even smaller than DNA and can be a result of a transfer deposit of skin cells. IIRC 7-8 cells are enough to produce touch DNA from. Touch DNA have to be replicated again and again to be able to produce a DNA profile from it as a result. With other words add even more zeros behind the 1: number representing the size of the regular size of a sample which can show DNA, and we will get the size of sample needed to get the touch DNA from.
This was a good enough size sample -even more than what is necessary to get a DNA profile from- as we heard the expert's testimony. This amount of DNA couldn't just be transference off of clothes or off whatever else. This amount of DNA could only be a result of CM physically being in his trunk at some point, one way or another.
Not to mention that according to EA's own statements to LE Christina was nowhere near of his car. According to EA his car was nowhere near to Christina's car either.

The cell ping evidence is also solid. The defense expert just conveniently "forgot" to add the portion of the data which is the most important part of it all. This was not an accident, this was an omission. I would go ahead and say it was lie by omission. He was talking about something completely different than what the state based his tracking on. This is how the defense again tried to muddy the water. It's understandable if people who are not really familiar with cellphone technology could be led into the woods with that testimony. But after that the prosecution on rebuttal recalled their expert, who clearly explained what the difference is and why the defense expert's testimony has nothing to do with what the state based their tracking on.

All IMHO

DAAAAMMNNN, Orgona, you betta preach lol!

I literally LOVE your post. Not just like, not just support, we're talking a standing ovation, in public, around my phone kind of love.

 

[LookingForClues]

http://starlocalmedia.com/allenamer...cle_14dd4862-9de4-11e4-b48e-5765cf2b7e65.html


"Arochi said when he returned home he found his brother, Carlos, passed out on the couch so he woke him up and told him to go to bed. His parents were out of town." from his interview with Det Stamm on 9/3 and 9/4.No time specified though

4:30 a.m. was also the time EA neighbor testified that EA asked her to look on her security camera. It didn't show but VW tweeted that the camera only showed 1/3 of EA family drive and he could have been parked in front. JMHO (just posting because I remembered that time of morning, IIRC and may be wrong but think it was one of the days he did interview with PPD that he asked neighbor that)

Thanks for your help! I found both of those references, but not the one where I THOUGHT it put the 2-and-2 together way back when. I could have sworn that EA says something along the lines of, "I went straight home and my brother was asleep on the couch. He can tell you that I was home by about 4:30 AM."

So, maybe that was just my brain, connecting his "I went straight home" in the early stories with the "My brother was asleep on the couch and I woke him" in the early stories, in conjunction with someone else saying early on that if he went straight home, he would be there around 4:30.

:sigh: My husband is going to tease my that my "memory like an elephant is getting Alzheimer's."

 

[arkansasmimi]

Originally Posted by b.humble View Post

I believe the post it note was found in early September during a trash pull. To your point of getting rid of evidence right away, it appears as though that was exactly what he may have been doing. Also, since EA had not been arrested yet, he did not have a lawyer at that time.

Deleting text messages to HF so as to manage the optics of innocence was a stupid tactic; it just made him look that much more guilty. Also, EA not only deleted text messages, but completely wiped the stolen phone's history preventing LE from forensically extracting information directly from the phone. Thankfully phone records are maintained by the telecommunications company which is how LE was able to find out about communications (calls, texts, data usage) and cell tower pings.

EA returned the stolen phone back to Sprint sometime in September. Within a few days or a few weeks after returning it he was arrested for theft of that phone.

Originally Posted by arkansasmimi View Post

Thanks, I was just going by testimony and may have misremembered on note, but Busby according to tweets PPD did weekly trash pulls. The receipts were found in the last trash pull were Dec 2014. (corrected my post from Nov)

Post#220
Natalie Solis ‏@Fox4Natalie 2m2 minutes ago McKinney, TX
Busby: in Dec trash pull frm Arochi house found receipts from wkd Morris went missing - incl Cartopia receipt from 9/3/14@FOX4 #arochitrial

** if this tweet is factual, it says AFTER EA was arrested, so someone besides EA threw them away, depending on the trash put out and arrest time whether it could have been him. IF he was already arrested, then he didn't throw away, he kept them. JMHO
Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 2m2 minutes ago
After arrest, Busby said she did one more trash run at Arochi hom and recovered receipts from 8/29/14-9/3/14 #arochitrial

Agree about thinking can get rid of phone records. Even deleting stuff. Just hoping that witness testimony didn't confuse jury as did me with conflicting testimony by PPD. Just stating my observations from first hearing evidence presented.

Edit to add: I respectfully disagree that just because he had not been arrested yet that he didn't need an attorney. He had been to PPD twice and interview and photos taken and so forth. He should have had one with him. Also can't remember date arrested on stolen phone and note found but I don't know if he spoke with an attorney or not but didn't throw away receipt til Dec 2014.

Please do not read any snark in this. I'm typing on phone and striving for brevity. This key pad is on my last nerve.

1-receipts in Dec. v. post it note in Sept. I understand you spoke about both, but I was only speaking to the post it note to help with date discrepancy. It probably would have been more helpful for me to state that.
2- This is the biggest clarification I want to make. I hope this was just misread or maybe a response to someone else, but I never said EA didn't need an attorney because he had not been arrested, only that he did not have an attorney at the time the post it note was found. I agree with you though, I 100% agree with you, albeit for different reasons, I assume: EA was undeniably in need of an attorney by 8/30.

No snark taken, and maybe I misunderstood your post. I added all for context.
But it still is very possible that after 9/3 & 9/4/2014 EA did speak with an attorney (not saying anything other than it is a possibility and that it also a possibility that why the post it note written) I got myself confused thinking that the receipts and post it note were together. (trying to read all the tweets) so for my misunderstanding I apologize.

 

[Latestforever]

I am on the edge of my seat waiting, still optimistic about a guilty verdict. I remember at the beginning I had a very hard time letting go of the idea that HF was responsible, it took a while to come around. If it weren't for the DNA and lies I wouldn't be so convinced. I am imagining that the jury is hashing out those topics as well and some may need time to get past HF did it. I hope there is that voice of reason like SteveS to keep it on track.

 

[arkansasmimi]

If you are a Juror you heard much more than we red throughout the tweets. There always was a clarification in redirect. According to what I have read in the tweets, the state handled very well dubious questions in redirect.
The problem could be if some of the Jurors don't use their logical thinking and fells into the guilt trip the defense presented at closing. They used various dubious statements at closing too to confuse the Jury. If the Jury is smart and is capable of logical thinking they have enough evidence. I don't mind if they deliberate long. At least this way they will have no regret whatever they decide.

:thinking: so if they do not come back with the verdict you expect that makes them what? Not smart or capable of logical thinking in your opinion? I totally agree and very much understand that we did not get the FULL version from tweets. But again, it is ok because I am not one of the 12 that will render the verdict to begin with. But I am appreciative for the tweets and the members who went to court and shared back. I still stick by my opinion. JMHO