Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 71
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by BrownRice View Post
    Another round of questions - did she talk about the "jogger" who was out on the morning of 7/12? Was any credibility ever given to her? Was RZ dismissed entirely?
    We did talk about RZ (she brought it up). She actually found her believable. She pointed out about her saying as soon as she saw the flyer that she said this is the woman I saw. And she found her believable because this all happened before NC was found.


  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    Interesting discussion, NCSU!

    Did this juror mention anything about the evidence they DID look at (request) during deliberations? Remember they asked for photos of the house & NC's body at Fielding Dr, depo videos, receipts from BJs and a few other things. They did not ask to see the Google maps during deliberations.

    I sure hope at least some of the jury members give Dateline an interview. As I said before, that's always one of my fav parts of a Dateline crime/case show.
    No, and I really wanted to ask about that. But it was pool closing time. One thing I did want to mention....we talked about reasonable doubt. She said that the jury charge sheet gave very specific definitions of reasonable doubt (ie, it has to meet criteria 1, 2, 3, 4, etc). That is how she was eventually able to change her vote to guilty despite her doubts. Same thing with 1st versus 2nd. 1st have 5 guidelines it had to meet and 2nd had 3. They really didn't spend much time on 2nd degree, and agrees with me (and just about everyone) that it had to be 1st or NG.


  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ncsu95 For This Useful Post:


  4. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    Also, I'm curious what, specifically, this juror said about what 'bothered' her about J.A.? Since this juror knew about the judge looking into juror misconduct then she must have been part of that situation he only spoke to one juror and told that person not to discuss it with anyone else.
    The "bothered" comment doesn't deal with the jury misconduct. I shouldn't have posted that in the thread, so I'm not going to discuss her reasons. It falls into line with discussing her opinions on the attorneys.


  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ncsu95 For This Useful Post:


  6. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,483
    I knew the 'bothered' comment wasn't related to the juror misconduct incident. I am curious about the juror's opinion on the various witnesses and since you mentioned JA specifically, I wanted to know what was bothersome to this juror.


  7. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,483
    Quote Originally Posted by ncsu95 View Post
    We did talk about RZ (she brought it up). She actually found her believable. She pointed out about her saying as soon as she saw the flyer that she said this is the woman I saw. And she found her believable because this all happened before NC was found.


    RZ was straight out of central casting for the "R Z" character. No other actress is ever needed to play her in the movie version. She was hilarious. Oh I'm sure she believed she saw NC running that morning, but she did not since NC was already dead and discarded by 7am. She had the tall female runner wearing an iPod, which was not accurate.


  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Madeleine74 For This Useful Post:


  9. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,483
    I'm glad they followed the written instructions for rendering their verdict. Reasonable doubt is confusing for many. A lot of people think you have to have ZERO doubt about everything to convict and that is not the standard. And neither is a jury to consider each item of evidence separate/apart from the totality of all the evidence put together.

    No one in a circumstantial case would ever be convicted if all juries did was debate each item or behavior and decide whether an explanation for it (and it alone) could be explained away as something normal or mere coincidence. It's only when putting everything together that a picture can emerge.


  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Madeleine74 For This Useful Post:


  11. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    I knew the 'bothered' comment wasn't related to the juror misconduct incident. I am curious about the juror's opinion on the various witnesses and since you mentioned JA specifically, I wanted to know what was bothersome to this juror.
    Some of the obvious things were JAs call to the police that morning (she thought it was strange that she would jump to that conclusion so quickly...even though it turned out to be right). The other obvious one was MHs testimony about all information to the police had to go through her, as well as the coordinated effort and the affidavits. That is some of where the "bothered" comment comes from. It's very similar to comments made on here. I will say that I am 100% certain she didn't disobey the judges order on discussing the case or reading things. She was very concerned about breaking any rules. She also couldn't believe that she didn't hear about the NC murder when it happened. She said she has a child with a birthday around that time and she guesses she was consumed with planning stuff for that...but she never paid any attention to it back in 2008.


  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ncsu95 For This Useful Post:


  13. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    I asked her specifically if she thought BC spoofed a call. She didn't really have an answer, but she did say that the "techie" guy explained that all he would need is a fax machine to do it. Or there is some way to do it with AOL (I didn't get specifics). But that allowed them to get beyond the lack of proof for the phone call.

    Some others....she didn't believe he disposed of the shoes between HT trips. She said they saw tons of shoes in the pictures and assumed he simply changed shoes when leaving for the 2nd trip (which is what the defense said in opening). She also said she didn't believe the police ever asked him for him and knows the search warrant for them wasn't until October.

    She thinks the CPD did a horrible job. She couldn't believe some of the things the detectives did (like sitting in the bed). She was told later (after the trial) that Daniels is a good detective, but doesn't take good notes...he just remembers a lot of things. But she wasn't at all happy with either Daniels or Young. She doesn't have an opinion as to why the phone was erased. But she was very bothered that they didn't investigate that phone on the 12th when she was still a missing person. I think we can all agree on that...they should have gotten BCs permission to check the phone on the 12th.


  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ncsu95 For This Useful Post:


  15. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post


    RZ was straight out of central casting for the "R Z" character. No other actress is ever needed to play her in the movie version. She was hilarious. Oh I'm sure she believed she saw NC running that morning, but she did not since NC was already dead and discarded by 7am. She had the tall female runner wearing an iPod, which was not accurate.
    I think most people believe RZ. I believe completely that she thinks she saw NC that morning. I'm not convinced she didn't...but I understand why her testimony was basically dismissed.


  16. The Following User Says Thank You to ncsu95 For This Useful Post:


  17. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Another thing...she was very upset at the cross examination of Carrie Dittner. She didn't say this, but I get the opinion that he was found guilty in spite of the prosecution team, not because of it. I guess that is how it should be...your like/dislike of an attorney shouldn't factor into guilt or innocence. But she specifically talked about that cross examination as well as the cross of Jay Ward. They (or at least she) couldn't believe that Boz went the whole facebook route. She also talked about the whole tennis grip thing and found Cummings reaction to be ridiculous. I told her we called him Gangsta Howard after that.


  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ncsu95 For This Useful Post:


  19. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,483
    Quote Originally Posted by ncsu95 View Post
    Some of the obvious things were JAs call to the police that morning (she thought it was strange that she would jump to that conclusion so quickly...even though it turned out to be right). The other obvious one was MHs testimony about all information to the police had to go through her, as well as the coordinated effort and the affidavits. That is some of where the "bothered" comment comes from. It's very similar to comments made on here. I will say that I am 100% certain she didn't disobey the judges order on discussing the case or reading things. She was very concerned about breaking any rules. She also couldn't believe that she didn't hear about the NC murder when it happened. She said she has a child with a birthday around that time and she guesses she was consumed with planning stuff for that...but she never paid any attention to it back in 2008.
    Ahhh. Interesting. I suppose she believed that witness and especially that bit he threw out there and never considered he wasn't telling the truth. His testimony was a bit, shall we say, creative, and/or his perceptions were strange.


  20. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,954
    Thanks for letting us in on your conversation ncsu95. It was very enlightening. I was totally confused by the technical testimony, so I would assume that the jury would be also. You can't blame them too much for listening to a juror who says they know about this stuff. I would have to defer to them also. The defense really needed to make that evidence a lot less confusing to have the lay person understand it, imo. I would have to determine from the fact that they didn't, that they couldn't. If I was on the jury, I would have had to disregard it completely, I guess. just talkin' out loud
    Thanks again.
    "Crack up the music and dance!"


  21. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,483
    JAs call to the police that morning
    That call was in the afternoon, not in the morning, and was made to a non-emergency number asking for advice on what to do. I wonder if some of the facts were missed (or were mistaken). I know from reading comments in lots of places that most people do not have much (or in some cases, any) knowledge of the facts and testimony from this trial, and I've seen a lot of incorrect things posted.


  22. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Madeleine74 For This Useful Post:


  23. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    ^that's probably my mistake about morning. I will add this...I led most of the conversation with my questions. Obviously I have a different view of things than a lot of people in here. So my perceptions from our conversation last night are based on the questions that I asked. I asked things that were bothering me or were puzzling to me. I'm sure Madeleine or others in here would have asked a completely different set of questions. I just wanted to share our conversation (again, with her permission) because I spent so much time in this forum with all of you.


  24. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to ncsu95 For This Useful Post:


  25. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,483
    That makes sense then. Your perspective and feelings were in more one direction than the other and the shared comments seem to reflect back some of that.

    I hope no one tries to mislead any of the jurors with non-facts and outright lies of the case (like evidence planting, conspiracies, etc). Their job was tough enough without all that crap now being thrown in their faces. Had I read those hateful comments after the verdict and I was on the jury, I would no longer read any of it and also never speak about the case. The jury did a job and they did it to the best of their ability.


  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Madeleine74 For This Useful Post:


Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •