GUILTY NC - Kathy Taft, 62, Raleigh, 6 March 2010 - #6

If LWOP was offered and refused, I have no issue, as this guy absolutely needs to be locked away forever and day at minimum. But I suspect LWOP wasn't offered (just my speculation, as I think since they're admitting his involvement, they would have taken that sentence).

I guess this is all quite political.

JMO, but I'd guess they are going for less then LWOP, hence the need for a trial. JW has that narcicisstic type personality again, IMO. And they've taken on this whole 'everybody else is at fault but our poor, mentally ill, client.' I think they are going for much less than LWOP. I'm reminded of that other distant N.C. case. Perhaps borndem can help me here, the guy who shot & killed a number of people and ended up in Dorthea Dix, was his name Michael something or other?
 
I'm a bit confused. Did this a-h confess in open court and the trial is still proceeding?

His attorney conceded the fact that his client raped and bashed in the head of Kathy, but he was on drugs & intoxicated at the time, and of course his 'mental illness'. Coming from a family of alcoholics and nutty people, it just wasn't his *fault*. :banghead:
 
His attorney conceded the fact that his client raped and bashed in the head of Kathy, but he was on drugs & intoxicated at the time, and of course his 'mental illness'. Coming from a family of alcoholics and nutty people, it just wasn't his *fault*. :banghead:

Maaan, that's effed up.
 
What the heck, as someone said earlier, why go through the chain of evidence and procedure when they already conceded that JW did beat and rape Ms. Taft (without thinking or planning, of course)?

Seems like the DT would tread carefully on casting aspersion on LE, etc. when it has already been conceded. I would worry about alienating the jury if I was part of the DT.
 
It does seem ridiculous to dredge up all the scientific procedures since, as you folks are saying, he has admitted to the crime...it seems to me the trial should be about mitigating the circumstances pertaining to his punishment..maybe someone can explain why all this type of testimony is neccessary.
 
It does seem ridiculous to dredge up all the scientific procedures since, as you folks are saying, he has admitted to the crime...it seems to me the trial should be about mitigating the circumstances pertaining to his punishment..maybe someone can explain why all this type of testimony is neccessary.

I think he's looking for the jury to find him guilty of something less than first degree murder, and then possibly finding him 'too mentally ill at the time' to be held responsible for his actions. Stick him in the nut house for a short time, get him on meds, and then hopefully he can skip merrily out on the street once again. Go off his meds, drink, use more drugs, and we'll be right back where we are again. :maddening:
 
I'm disappointed we can't see this video? The victim had long been removed from the scene, why can't we see the video???
 
I think he's looking for the jury to find him guilty of something less than first degree murder, and then possibly finding him 'too mentally ill at the time' to be held responsible for his actions. Stick him in the nut house for a short time, get him on meds, and then hopefully he can skip merrily out on the street once again. Go off his meds, drink, use more drugs, and we'll be right back where we are again. :maddening:

So true gracielee..we read about these stories over and over again..
 
They've got him dressed like a choir boy....geez. Remember defense team the juries are stupid.(well maybe CA's was, but most aren't!!!!!!!!)
 
At the time of this crime, it was so much like the rape and beating of that TV anchorwoman in IIRC, Little Rock, Arkansas. She too eventually died days later from her beating. I can't recall her name, but her mom was the one who found her and called 911. She too was beaten in the middle of the night.
 
This crime is one's worst nightmare: waking up in the night to a killer. It's so horrifying. It's really difficult to scare me, but last night I slept with a bat and the bedroom door locked.

Lesson from this case: always bring in your mail every day. Never let mail sit in your mailbox in case someone's casing your house.
 
This crime is one's worst nightmare: waking up in the night to a killer. It's so horrifying. It's really difficult to scare me, but last night I slept with a bat and the bedroom door locked.

Lesson from this case: always bring in your mail every day. Never let mail sit in your mailbox in case someone's casing your house.

The problem with that is, this wasn't her house. The house belonged to her boyfriend who was out of town at the time. She was there recuperating from a surgery she'd had that day. I guess they never even thought of checking his mailbox. I don't believe him anyway, that he didn't see the car in the drive-way and thought the house was empty. He had to walk right past the car to get into the house. I count on my two big dogs to warn me and give me time to get to my gun. I've got a hundred pound rottie mix that sleeps right beside me on the bed. And another 100 lb. dog that sleeps at the top of the stairs.
 
gracie, sounds like you are safe!

Does anyone know if JW's wife divorced him?
 
gracie, sounds like you are safe!

Does anyone know if JW's wife divorced him?

LOL, yes, I do sleep well at night. Both of my dogs are rescues, and therefore extremely bonded with my family. I feel certain, especially my rottie, would fight hard if someone were to threaten us.

I think she divorced him but I'm not positive of that. I think borndem would or Prancy would know for sure.
 
It does seem ridiculous to dredge up all the scientific procedures since, as you folks are saying, he has admitted to the crime...it seems to me the trial should be about mitigating the circumstances pertaining to his punishment..maybe someone can explain why all this type of testimony is neccessary.

I think that the state has to present all the evidence they have just as if the defense attorney had not made those admissions of guilt in the opening statement, since what the say in the opening statement cannot be considered as evidence. Plus, the defense is denying it is first degreee murder, IMO because he was too intoxicated to form the intent to murder the victim. I guess all of the state's evidence will hopefully prove that it was premediated, first degree murder.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
91
Guests online
1,247
Total visitors
1,338

Forum statistics

Threads
589,168
Messages
17,915,110
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top