1402 users online (268 members and 1134 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 17 of 60 FirstFirst ... 7 15 16 17 18 19 27 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 255 of 887
  1. #241
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Locked Room
    Posts
    2,812
    Quote Originally Posted by Cherry View Post
    I don't see how any jury could convict from the "evidence" put forth.
    We are in the minority here, but I agree.
    "All your life, all your love, all your hate, all your memory, all your pain, it was all the same thing. It was all the same dream—a dream that you had inside a locked room. A dream about being a person.” - True Detective

    Help Save the Next Girl. http://helpsavethenextgirl.com

    Help Find Shane Fell. Http://helpfindshanefell.com

  2. #242
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,335
    The investigators fully investigated Britt. They were convinced it was him, put him under surveillance, wiretapped him, searched his property and vehicles, interviewed everyone he knew, and came to the conclusion that it was not him.
    “Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn

  3. #243
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    903
    The ADA absolutely put all the pieces together. Its the only REASONABLE explanation.

  4. #244
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    903
    All J Autry's testimony was corroborated. That's very significant.

  5. #245
    SteveS is offline Attention: All my comments are IMO JMO MOO AFAIK etc
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Aydrianna523 View Post
    All J Autry's testimony was corroborated. That's very significant.
    Actually essentially NONE of J Autry's actual evidence about the crime was corroborated, although the state tried hard to leave the impression that his evidence was corroborated by using that word to refer to things that had little to do with the crime.

    J Autry says Holly was shot by ZA (and no one else). Corroboration? None. In fact, was she shot from the front (as JA said) or behind (like the autopsy said)?
    J Autry says the shooting happened at the river. Corroboration? None. They found absolutely nothing in the area to indicate HB and the others were in that place, although JA said they were there multiple times.
    J Autry says the kidnapping was by ZA who was there to meet Clint. Corroboration? None. In fact, they don't really have anything to indicate any of the 4 were ever at Holly's that day.

    I could go on and on, but the defense did a pretty good job of poking one hole after another in JA's testimony, and the only things they had that matched are the side items (not really part of the crime) where JA knew what someone else would say, and then said the same thing. But they had NOTHING to back up his claims that this crime or that happened here or there and in this way or that, from any of the various places.
    .
    REMINDER: All my comments are IMO AFAIK
    All posts are offered imo and to the best of my knowledge.

  6. #246
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Steamy South
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by Walker007 View Post
    I have never seen a weaker case than this put on by the state and I am shocked this even made it to trial. NOT GUILTY would be my verdict if I was a juror. The only way I see guilty coming in is if all 12 jurors are basing their judgement on pure emotion with no logic or reasoning behind it. I watched every single second of this trial, took notes, and even transcribed at times. Rewatched various testimonies. There are a ton of holes and contradictions. The timelines don't match up or correlate in driving times that the state is trying to allege. They didn't outline this for they jury because it wouldn't work. Just as their cell data was vanilla in it's presentation, as it doesn't work. Their theory continued to evolve through the trial. I have much to share in my observations but I have literally let my house go to wreck to watch the trial.


    I will comment more later with
    Excellent post! I agree 100%.

  7. #247
    SteveS is offline Attention: All my comments are IMO JMO MOO AFAIK etc
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,058
    <modsnip>

    I do understand the feeling that if we can't actually PROVE who did it, then we'd better convict the best suspect we have. "Somebody did it, so lets hang these guys for lack of a better idea" is certainly not how justice works, and that's not what the jury swore to do, but it sure would be hard not to go there. I would not be any different, if it was me in that jury.

    If you think you see a diff between women and men on how they have responded to this case, maybe it's women responding to the emotional side of the case - the need for someone to pay even if evidence is insufficient because it's just so sad, and ZA not being a likeable guy anyhow so who cares. Men and women are different, and respond differently sometimes. But I haven't noticed any particular pattern myself, just people seeing things as they see it..

    But ultimately, there is a huge difference between suspicion and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I simply don't think actual PROOF was ever provided. Lots of good suspicion, though.

    The state's whole case revolves around the honesty of JA speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and I just don't see his story as meeting that standard. There were lots of issues with the content that make me doubtful, such as
    - the side jabs he inserted, for example, that aren't really believable yet used to try to paint the others in a light the jury might not like,
    - the way he excused himself from partaking in any of the actual acts, which if he is to be believed in general simply isn't believable,
    - some contradictions with proven facts,
    - lack of physical evidence in places where it made no sense to be lacking (if he's telling the truth), and
    - the fact he was a bought-and-paid-for witness, there with the admitted goal of saying whatever it would take to try to make the state happy.
    I end up with the conclusion that his testimony was a collage of convenience, ie a mixture of fiction and fact (which could be explained by him knowing the other testimony to come) tailored to fit the case. And to me, given his motivation and his claims, it's either all or nothing, since the most deceptive lies are built on half truths.

    I also go back to the basic core piece of the case, when looking for who did it, and man I end up with huge question marks lit up like a neon sign there as well. From actual eyewitness testimony, someone besides one of the 4 physically must have taken HB away that day, because not a single one fit. The state didn't even try to explain that, when accusing the 4. So how do we go from there to saying these 4 did it? Even JA had no explanation, but instead his story simply has HB magically in the possession of the others when he innocently wandered by, supposedly. Goodness.
    Last edited by Harmony 2; 09-22-2017 at 10:27 AM. Reason: snipped quoted post
    REMINDER: All my comments are IMO AFAIK
    All posts are offered imo and to the best of my knowledge.

  8. #248
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Steamy South
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveS View Post
    I do understand the feeling that if we can't actually PROVE who did it, then we'd better convict the best suspect we have. "Somebody did it, so lets hang these guys for lack of a better idea" is certainly not how justice works, and that's not what the jury swore to do, but it sure would be hard not to go there. I would not be any different, if it was me in that jury.

    If you think you see a diff between women and men on how they have responded to this case, maybe it's women responding to the emotional side of the case - the need for someone to pay even if evidence is insufficient because it's just so sad, and ZA not being a likeable guy anyhow so who cares. Men and women are different, and respond differently sometimes. But I haven't noticed any particular pattern myself, just people seeing things as they see it..

    But ultimately, there is a huge difference between suspicion and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I simply don't think actual PROOF was ever provided. Lots of good suspicion, though.

    The state's whole case revolves around the honesty of JA speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and I just don't see his story as meeting that standard. There were lots of issues with the content that make me doubtful, such as
    - the side jabs he inserted, for example, that aren't really believable yet used to try to paint the others in a light the jury might not like,
    - the way he excused himself from partaking in any of the actual acts, which if he is to be believed in general simply isn't believable,
    - some contradictions with proven facts,
    - lack of physical evidence in places where it made no sense to be lacking (if he's telling the truth), and
    - the fact he was a bought-and-paid-for witness, there with the admitted goal of saying whatever it would take to try to make the state happy.
    I end up with the conclusion that his testimony was a collage of convenience, ie a mixture of fiction and fact (which could be explained by him knowing the other testimony to come) tailored to fit the case. And to me, given his motivation and his claims, it's either all or nothing, since the most deceptive lies are built on half truths.

    I also go back to the basic core piece of the case, when looking for who did it, and man I end up with huge question marks lit up like a neon sign there as well. From actual eyewitness testimony, someone besides one of the 4 physically must have taken HB away that day, because not a single one fit. The state didn't even try to explain that, when accusing the 4. So how do we go from there to saying these 4 did it? Even JA had no explanation, but instead his story simply has HB magically in the possession of the others when he innocently wandered by, supposedly. Goodness.
    Excellent!

  9. #249
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,506
    Quote Originally Posted by Aydrianna523 View Post
    All J Autry's testimony was corroborated. That's very significant.
    JA recounted for the defense attorney what happened after he arrived that morning. When he got to the part about driving to the river, she asked him when Holly had heard his name, as he claimed she did. He said it was when he first arrived. The defense attorney then reminded him that he never said that when recounting his story. He then says she heard his name after they were in the pick up and were talking while driving to dispose of her body. The defense attorney then says "But you were in the cab of the pick up and she was in the bed of the pick up so how could she hear what you were talking about." He then sat there with a dumb look on his dumb face. He's a liar. That's very significant. He's also a kidnapper, a rapist and a murderer who fully participated in everything that went on, despite his BS testimony that he crafted to leave that out. He certainly was concerned about trying to go fishing at that pond and going back to the barn to make sure there wasn't any evidence left behind for someone who didn't do anything to Holly. He needs to get the death penalty. If he's dead, there's no possibility he could escape from prison to rape and kill again, which he could do without batting an eye .He's the worst of all of them, despite his charming story telling abilities that some people were so taken with.

  10. #250
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1
    Been sleuthing on this forum for many years. I've been folllowing this trial online, a first timer for me. I feel the urge to post something.

    I have seen that I'm in the minority. I just can't believe that a jury can convict him of the evidence that was shown in trial. I mean it 's a man's life on the line (I'm from Europe so the whole death penalty just blows my mind but that aside). I know he's a druggie and I know he is not that smart (ok i will say pretty darn stupid) and did some bad things in his life (robbery, incest etc) before the murder of Holly. I know drugs make you do really stupid things and one of those things could be murder. And he could have done it but the evidence that was shown in trial doesn't clear the 'could have' factor, in my opinion.
    .
    JA's testimony
    Can you really convict someone to death just based one man's confession? There is no real evidence found on the counts of kidnapping and rape other than JA's confession. Unfortunately we know Holly is dead and was murdered. So first I will question the murder count.
    -You don't know under what circumstances the confession of JA was given. TBI was under a lot of pressure to solve this case. ZA, DA, JA, SA knew they were poi's in the case. They probably knew that the community thought they were guilty as well. That's a lot of stress. Your life's a mess and worthless cause of all the drugs and everybody finds you quilty of a horrendous crime. That could be the reason fo SA's death. Didn't JA confess after SA's death and after DA's confession?? And didn't he confessed after she was found? So a lot of the facts were already made public? So you know you are a druggie, TBI and community against you, no money for good defence. Isn't the only two ways out to take the matter in your own hands and take your own life (like SA did) or save it and put the blame on somebody else? Make you less guilty of a crime? This still could be the case, right?
    -I mean JA gave a really good solid testimony but for me a little to good. I mean they were high on drugs right? Everybody is saying when your on drugs you don't think straigth and that's the of the weird things in this case (like the burn pit next to SA's trailer, but they didn't burn her belongings in it etc) Well, than JA has a pretty good memory if I may say so myself after all these years, knowing exactly wanted happened, conversations etc. and be high on drugs at that time. That's why I still question his testimony. So there is my doubt on his testimony as a whole.
    -I found the river story a little bit weird. I mean he could've killed DA anywhere. I little to much thought for a druggie to make a whole plan to go fish and kill him... If you are high on drugs and freaking out of what happened and thinking somebody would run his mouth wouldn't you just kill him (I mean they killed Holly so they haven't a problem with killing)? So little time but you make a whole plan on killing DA? Then there was the confession that the killings found place at the river. Have there ever have been prove to this?
    -JA told that Holly was shot from the front by ZA. Didn’t autopsy prove otherwise? That she was shot from behind?
    -I also found that he said they made meth that morning a little questionable? Were is al this time SA claims to have?? Kidnap Holly, drive to SA aunt, rape her, murder her, go to the river, go home for the cable guy, dump the body AND make meth? ZA met his gf at 11 right? or was it the cable guy at 11? So they have from 8am tot 11am to do this all? Still too many questions for me unfortunately and these aren’t even all the questions I have.
    So with doubts of his testimony I don't know if you could find ZA guilty of the kidnap and rape counts.

    ZA freaking out in the evening
    Couldn't that just be because being high on drugs? Hallucinations? Paranoia? DA hadn't slept in forever? They made meth that morning right?
    Little to go on to prove it wasn’t Holly related but also little to go on and prove it is in fact Holly related

    Gun
    It still could be a random gun right? It's a gun area. It involves druggies. No hard evidence that it's the murder weapon. We have the testimony of Dinsmore that he traded drugs for the gun. Well that can true but unfortunately still be unrelated to Holly's murder. And don't forget Dinsmore was given immunity for this testimony.

    Phone Pings
    Sometimes (I believe 2 times?) ZA was in the same area as Holly that morning. Only two times(?) of the pings that morning he could be near Holly. Could is still in line here. I don't find this hard evidence since it's a pretty large area (it isn't a spot) it doesn't specify were ZA and Holly would be exactly that time. It could be that they were miles apart and on the other lines of the area right? I mean if this is hard evidence shouldn't we all let our phones at home? I mean you just can be at the wrong place at the wrong time and you could be convicted (in this case to death) based on only two pings in an area?

    The statements ZA made to the inmates.
    -They're not really that concide with the evidence that was found. ZA told them as a threat he would put them or others 'next to her in the hole'. Well JA testimony concluded the riverside as deposel of the body and the remains of Holly were found on the ground not in a grave, right? Both will rule out that Holly was every buried.
    -The area that they all live in is a gun area, right? Aren't most murders commit with a gun? When you’re dead you’re most likely buried, right? So it’s easy to say those 2 things in a threat to make you seem tough. It's really sound like just a really stupid, stupid bragging story of ZA to me.

    Clint's testimony
    -He is concerned about the situation so he calls his mom. Why not go to Holly herself and ask her if she has to go to school?
    -He peaks through the blinds and stood there for a while. If you're concerned why not open the damn window. I mean it's YOUR SISTER!
    -Then you know she has to be at school and you see her walked to the woods, why not screaming after her or going after her asking her whats up? I find this still fishy.
    -Then he gave TBI a description of the man going in to the woods. This could have been ZA if you look at him now but we all know how he looked back in the druggie day's. Nothing like this description. Clint first said Holly was dragged in to the woods and later he changed it into she walked in to the woods. But there was blood found...
    -I also can't go over the fact Holly knew Clint was at home why not give a yell or something? I know she has screamed but this as to be at the beginning otherwise Clint would have heard right?

    Too many damn questions. Don't get me wrong I WANT JUSTICE FOR HOLLY. But I have my doubts if this is the justice... It could be ZA but it still could someone else. Wrong place at the wrong time. Wrong livingstyle at the wrong time. The real killer could still be at large..

    Oh and the defense attorney.. well what should I say.. wouldn't have been my approach if it was a death penalty case. She is def not the best. No likeability factor at all. ZA appearance isn't on his side (creepy looking with the dark circles under his eyes etc.) so a little humanising him would have been on his favor to make the doubt better.

    Pros had a good closing. Perfect to put Hagerman's soft and calm demeanor first. Before the rambling and screaching voice of Thompson. And rebuttal with Nichols.
    Last edited by flipflapperd; 09-22-2017 at 04:53 AM.


  11. #251
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    3,617
    Does some of the problem with this case revolve around the fact that these drug-addicted criminals just
    do not think nor do they act like us normal people? They have very different attitudes and values to us.

    Also many people are finding it difficult to treat the four criminals (who acted in concert or as a team), as all being criminally responsible for all the crimes committed. It simply does not matter which of the four did the abduction, the rape, or the murder. If one of them did, then all four are guilty. But some of you are still discussing that.

    I was very impressed with the Prosecution's dramatic delivery of their closing arguments whereas I thought the Defence just raved on and I tuned out. She seemed to be trying too hard to convince the jury of reasonable doubt. The Judge looked bored too.

    IMO too many people are getting bogged down with peripheral issues and are not looking at the big picture.

    I don't know how anyone could still think that Britt was guilty.

    They must not have been listening. HE WAS CLEARED.

    if you still believe that Britt did it, then again you have not been listening.
    _________________________________________
    Unless I have included a link, it is my opinion and only my opinion that I am expressing

  12. #252
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Riga, Latvia
    Posts
    11,296
    Good morning all!

    Great discussions going on here - I'm going to add my vote to "Guilty", but no DP....

    Harmony - I corrected this later:

    ~2:30p - 3:30p - All (Zach, Jason & Shayne) at Dinsmore house (per house cleaner)

    It should read:

    ~2:30p - 3:30p - All (Zach, Jason & Shayne) at Dottie's house where Dinsmore is working (per house cleaner)




    I'm going to re-post what I THOUGHT I had posted - my laptop is giving me glitches. Had to download Firefox to get into WS.

    When did Jason leave his white pick up truck at Dinsmore or was it at the other guy's house (Bell?)? That night? that afternoon? Holly's body could have been in there while they figured out what to do with it. And I do believe he drove into Parsons with Dylan's truck.

    Quote Originally Posted by UndiscoveredTruth from tweet
    Juror will work until 6pm tonight then judge will ask if they have a verdict. If not they'll be sent home for the night #hollybobo
    I'm guessing the Judge thinks it's a slam dunk - !!


    K - I have a question - because I don't recall hearing this at all - I believe it was the ADA who said this/NOT word for word but the gist of the statement:
    Dylan was tracked at 9:10a going south with Holly's phone. BUT - didn't they not present any of the pings on Dylan's phone?? What did I miss?
    ~~Life isn't about waiting for the storms to pass... It's about learning to dance in the rain!~~
    ~~We are not human beings having a spiritual experience, we are spiritual beings having a human experience!~~
    ~~Veni, Vidi, Velcro! I came, I saw, I stuck around!~~

  13. #253
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Riga, Latvia
    Posts
    11,296
    Here's what I put together - have questions behind some of the times, so if anyone can add to it - it would be very much appreciated! TIA!

    April 13, 2011
    In case others want to see all in chronological order.

    4:54a - 8:18a – Zach – no activity (from 8:17a to 8:25a Holly's phone is moving near Cox Rd @ 641/I40)

    6:50a - Jason-- near Camden (GF house) text

    6:51a - 8:19a – Jason -- no pings

    7:00a - Karen Bobo leaves for work/Holly was sitting at dining room table, also texting back and forth with classmate Hannah
    7:30a -- Holly speaks to BF, Drew re hunting on grandmother's property
    7:30a - 7:40a - Holly -- home area
    7:40a - Neighbor hears a scream (& hears fighting for 45 seconds (per Def "cell" expert)
    7:42a - Holly -- last outgoing call (Me: wondering "who" she dialed-maybe not-phone in back pocket, she gets knocked to the ground in carport maybe and butt dials; someone tesified her phone in back pocket)
    7:45a - Neighbor's mother calls Karen
    7:50a - Clint is awakened by dogs barking/Karen calls Clint
    7:53a - 8:09a - Holly's phone connect to towers close to home
    7:55a - Karen calls 911 from work

    8:00a - Karen calls Clint to call 911 after he tells her what he saw
    8:00a - Holly's phone is moving
    8:11a - Holly's phone from house and hits Tower 1 then moved (per Def "cell" expert)
    8:16a - Holly's phone at Shiloh Rd Tower
    8:17a - Holly's phone going north I40 (Shiloh Rd Tower)
    8:17a - 8:26a – Holly -- ping off 2 different towers / stays there for 25 minutes (per Def "cell" expert)
    8:17a - 8:55a - rape occurred between 8:17am and 8:55am (if Autry is to be believed that Holly was already in back of Zach's truck, wrapped at 8:55a )
    8:18a - Zach's phone on
    8:19a – Zach's phone at Cox Rd @ 641/I40- incoming text From JA
    8:19a - 8:53a - Zach's phone utilizing same tower close to his home
    8:28a -- Defense witness (Dicas) says ZA phone pings at home (several miles from where Holly's pings)
    8:30a – Zach -- outgoing text to JA
    8:30a - 8:52a Zach and JA-- texting back & forth
    8:53a - 8:55a – Zach - phone call from JA-call went to voice mail--Zach called JA back –Zach’s phone near Yellow Springs & Adams house (Holly's pinged twice just after 9 near where Adams' phone pings - by Yellow Springs near Cox Rd)
    8:55a – Jason phone - Autry, Adams & Holly's all shown in same area (same tower) - (at Shayne's where Jason sees Holly's body wrapped in back of Zach's truck)

    ~8:19a - 9:12a -- Zach's phone close to home-in same general area of where Holly's phone pings)
    8:57a - 9:00a -- Holly's phone pings Yellow Springs area (2nd ping)
    9:02a - 9:06a – Holly's phone - East of Shiloh Rd @ Cox & I40/641 (3rd tower pinged) Same tower as Zach's house
    9:10a – Holly - Sugar Tree near Tennessee River (Me: possibly Shayne leaves to dump her phone)
    9:10a - 10:43a --Zach - texts between ZA & Shayne Austin/Zach @ Birdsong area
    9:12a – Zach's phone pings Yellow Springs area (Holly's 2nd ping in same area)
    9:25a – Holly - pings near home - final ping - sim & phone found in this area.
    9:40a - Holly's phone stops pinging/probably dead battery
    9:42a - 10:37a – Jason phone -- pings near Tenn River near Birdsong Rd exit (Zach & Jason at Birdsong with Holly's body)
    9:50a – Zach - pings near Tennessee River

    10:01a - 10:32a - Zach continually texting Shayne
    10:35a - Zach's phone uses the other side of tower near Birdsong Rd exit
    10:35a - Jason's phone uses the other side of tower near Birdsong Rd exit
    10:38a - Zach's phone moving away from tower & going back home
    10:39a – Jason - phone is moving away from tower at Birdsong Rd exit (again pings near Cox Rd. (leaves Tenn river area)

    11:04a -- CCTV at AmFarm shows TBI SUV traveling to Parsons
    11:05a -- CCTV at AmFarm shows TBI SUV traveling to Parsons
    11:07a -- CCT at AmFarm shows ZA's Pickup traveling to Parsons
    11a - 12p – Zach - in Parsons (video store w/GF)

    ~2:30p - 3:30p - All (Zach, Jason & Shayne) at Dottie's house where Dinsmore is working - (per house cleaner testimony)

    9:47p -- First 911 call by Dick Adams (ZA's GrF) - ZA is causing a problem
    9:49p - Second 911 call by DA - Didn't want officers to come over
    9:51p - Third 911 call by DA - ZA is back & causing problem; was raising hell, wanted guns & keys to his/Dylan's truck. More frantic call - sounds exasperated (JMO)
    ~~Life isn't about waiting for the storms to pass... It's about learning to dance in the rain!~~
    ~~We are not human beings having a spiritual experience, we are spiritual beings having a human experience!~~
    ~~Veni, Vidi, Velcro! I came, I saw, I stuck around!~~

  14. #254

  15. #255
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by Harmony2 View Post
    Another reason for not being able to see embedded tweets is due to having java script turned off.
    How do I find where I can change the java script settings. Thanks xx.

Page 17 of 60 FirstFirst ... 7 15 16 17 18 19 27 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 461
    Last Post: 10-13-2017, 12:40 PM
  2. Replies: 1059
    Last Post: 09-21-2017, 02:17 PM
  3. Replies: 1115
    Last Post: 09-18-2017, 08:47 AM
  4. Replies: 1183
    Last Post: 09-15-2017, 08:45 AM
  5. Replies: 781
    Last Post: 09-13-2017, 08:42 AM