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

New Posts

The defendant appears totally unfazed. Is he texting, what is he doing looking down at what? Did they coach him to try to act semi-catatonic? I wonder if he has a shred of remorse.

Furthermore, why would a friend of Geils take this case (am I wrong that they were friends)? What a betrayal.
 
I hate to be critical, but would you wake up in the morning to get dressed for a murder trial, in which you will be a crucial witness, and select those earrings to wear? I don't get it.
 
borndem said:
:floorlaugh: I'm sure you meant that in all seriousness, but it just struck me as funny -- I really needed to chuckle. So thanks, NCB!!:lol:

We are all so offended at how the DT is handling their defense -- and yes, all their guns are empty - they've got nothing, nothing, nothing that will help this man, IMO. And all along, they've also been laying the groundwork for their destruction of DH. Can you just imagine a cross by Savage of that woman? DH may have a drinking problem, and it may be that she could have been a better caregiver -- IDK -- if only she'd seen him come in, dialed 911 immediately, had one of JG's guns loaded and shot him dead on the doorstep, this wouldn't have happened -- right? I guess that's what should have happened. So now she is yet another enabler for this poor, pitiful JW. Simply everybody has let this man down.
icon8.gif


And I don't get their line of pointing out how nothing was taken at 2710 -- if he didn't go in there to steal stuff then WTH did he go in to do? Just what he did, perhaps. It's early, maybe we'll find out, but it's beyond me at this time...
icon8.gif

icon8.gif
Click to expand...

I'm a bit tardy--still trying to get back in the swing of the local trial schedule. Yes, I was, with all sincerity, wishing you all a nice lunch break. I'm glad I could provide a laugh, however--always happy to oblige! LOL

I was actually kind of grateful for the break. I was growing tired of the DNA questioning when the defense had fessed up to rape, beating and murder in openings. I have to say, I actually respected the defense for doing that (as abhorrent as I find this crime), and I was thinking, with a great deal of naiveté it seems, that certain things would be stipulated to, or not challenged aggressively. It is almost like they are running a dual, catch-all defense, and doesn't seem cohesive to me thus far.
 
Prancy said:
I hate to be critical, but would you wake up in the morning to get dressed for a murder trial, in which you will be a crucial witness, and select those earrings to wear? I don't get it.
Click to expand...

The earrings don't bother me as much as the two yesterday who wore the low cut tops. One being a police officer. :fence:
 
gracielee said:
The earrings don't bother me as much as the two yesterday who wore the low cut tops. One being a police officer. :fence:
Click to expand...

Perhaps they were seeking fashion advice from TS in Arizona, GL? There was much discussion about her wardrobe choices the couple times I popped into the threads for her trial--especially one of the days she testified. It was pretty over the TOP (ba dum ching).

(I apologize in advance for that...)
 
At this rate, this trial appears to be going endlessly slow. Again, I think the DT would garner gratitude from the jury were they to stipulate 'yes, my client did rape this victim.' JMO But for WRAL continually interrupting testimony, I could at least be doing something else while listening. :-(
 
Usually no matter what trial I am watching I have a hard time focusing on DNA testimony, but when I already know he did it, this is driving me dingy.( and it's not that long of a drive....:0)
 
"Yes, he raped her. But now we are questioning the DNA analysis..." (This is not a direct quote - it's my deduction of today's proceedings.)

HUH? You just can't have it both freakin' ways! If this is pissing me off (scuse the French), I can't imagine how the jurors and FAMILY feel.
 
Boodles said:
"Yes, he raped her. But now we are questioning the DNA analysis..." (This is not a direct quote - it's my deduction of today's proceedings.)

HUH? You just can't have it both freakin' ways! If this is pissing me off (scuse the French), I can't imagine how the jurors and FAMILY feel.
Click to expand...

This is how I see it. Regardless of what the defense attorney said in the opening, if the state does not prove that the defendant was the one who broke into the house, raped and killed the victim, then at the close of the state's case, the defense will make a motion to dismiss for failure to prove their case. The opening was not evidence, so the state has to act as if it didn't happen.
 
Okay, I'm getting a headache. I think I'm gonna start organizing some coupons for a HT visit.
 
Prancy said:
This is how I see it. Regardless of what the defense attorney said in the opening, if the state does not prove that the defendant was the one who broke into the house, raped and killed the victim, then at the close of the state's case, the defense will make a motion to dismiss for failure to prove their case. The opening was not evidence, so the state has to act as if it didn't happen.
Click to expand...

Yes, Prancy, I think you have a good point.
 
I cranked the volume way up, and no sooner did I get into a big mess attempting to organize my sewing room closet, then that damn *bleep* came on again. My back and knees don't cooperate at all in attempts to get up and down off the floor. :(
 
gracielee said:
I cranked the volume way up, and no sooner did I get into a big mess attempting to organize my sewing room closet, then that damn *bleep* came on again. My back and knees don't cooperate at all in attempts to get up and down off the floor. :(
Click to expand...

I'm convinced they have secret reverse webcams installed, GL. Each time I get up to do something, the beep sounds and my 59 second race back to the laptop begins. It's annoying... However, I am grateful they are streaming the trial, so I guess I shouldn't complain.
 
gracielee said:
I cranked the volume way up, and no sooner did I get into a big mess attempting to organize my sewing room closet, then that damn *bleep* came on again. My back and knees don't cooperate at all in attempts to get up and down off the floor. :(
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. This is ridiculous. I watched the Young and Cooper trial on the WRAL live feed and I do not recall so much refreshing to continue the feed. It's too much. I have to find another feed. I think I read that there was another one. This is too confining for my taste.
 
I'm beginning to wish there was never a single CSI program on TV.
 
Can't believe the defense is trying to exclude the Labcorp verification test results of the DNA after they already stipulated that it was he who raped her. This is crazy.

I understand (at this point) the prosecution presenting this evidence. It's the defense team moves that have me perplexed. And IMO they're just going to irritate the jury with this 'baffle them with BS' tactic. (Yes, I know I am being redundant!) Or maybe they're brilliant and I just don't see it.

I hate to ask, but are the taxpayers paying for all these defense attorneys or did the family cough up some $?

/ok, now I will zip it and accept whatever's going on...
 
NCB said:
Perhaps they were seeking fashion advice from TS in Arizona, GL? There was much discussion about her wardrobe choices the couple times I popped into the threads for her trial--especially one of the days she testified. It was pretty over the TOP (ba dum ching).

(I apologize in advance for that...)
Click to expand...

Welcome again, newly-nominated ChairPerson of Comic Relief. :floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

If we can get a laff from this trial (as if!), we'll get 'em where we can!
 
gracielee said:
The earrings don't bother me as much as the two yesterday who wore the low cut tops. One being a police officer. :fence:
Click to expand...

Did someone say fashion??????? Are we gonna have MORE fun here than we did in TPS? I don't think my sense of style can handle this. :floorlaugh:
 
and yes, my thought is that the state still has to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, right? I mean, they carry the burden of proof?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 214 more.
Total: 2,959 (members: 215, guests: 2,744)

Online statistics

Members online
215
Guests online
2,744
Total visitors
2,959
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,754
Messages
17,958,471
Members
228,603
Latest member
megalow
Back
Top