GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #13

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
moonbeams said:
Soooooooo Maybe the defense is going to throw NL under the bus after all? He's so quiet and NL came in wearing the dog tags because she got wind? Totally a random thought of my own with no basis other than the defense attorney is acting strangely!
Click to expand...

His comment about Nichole made in front of the whole courtroom, leads me to think it's a strong possibility. If he were going to present her in a good light as a witness, why would he say that? The jury wasn't present, but everyone else heard it.
 
Well well well... it seems we may have an idea of a possible defense (And I'll bet he got the idea to say that form NL!):

from Beth's updated blog post (I added the bold)

Lee claimed not to be able to remember simple facts, like where in Oregon a friend of his lived, or even Erin's last name. Lee blamed this fogginess on combat-related memory problems. He also explained why he lied about his relationship with Erin when law enforcement approached him the morning after Erin went missing:
 
Meemaw12 said:
Great

Now let's just start cutting on one of only two who are providing us any information about the trial.

Joe was not in court on day 4 when the witness said he was mistaken about the tire tracks. As far as day 5 I will reserve judgment until I see a video or transcript. Hell people do make mistakes I make them everyday.
With all the evidence presented so far I doubt a conviction rests on tire tracks near where Erin's car was found especially jurors who know the desert lived in/near the desert.
Actually I think the testimony about CLs cell hitting near her car is more important. That places him there that morning, well unless you think some Tom, Dick or Harry had his phone and I don't.

Day 5 Beth blog FBI testimony

At roughly 7:36 a.m., Chris Lee's phone was in the same location where Erin Corwin's Toyota Corolla was later found abandoned.

Let that sink in.. pretty damning evidence IMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

BBM

I think that Beth Ford Roth has been absolutely amazing in her reporting. She's named every witness, gotten the key points they've made, and she's the only one so far to mention anything at all the defense has been doing.

Why don't you think someone else could have had Chris' phone?

The testimony was that Chris phone was pinging within 1600 meters of Erin's Car. Cell tower triangulation is not an exact science, and where the car was found at Ranch and Valle Vista is only 1.25 miles from their homes on Jasmine Drive. A trace could easily be off by 400 meters, especially in the early hours of the morning when radio signals have less impediment.
 
77DarkHorse7 said:
I think that Beth Ford Roth has been absolutely amazing in her reporting. She's named every witness, gotten the key points they've made, and she's the only one so far to mention anything at all the defense has been doing.

Why don't you think someone else could have had Chris' phone?

The testimony was that Chris phone was pinging within 1600 meters of Erin's Car. Cell tower triangulation is not an exact science, and where the car was found at Ranch and Valle Vista is only 1.25 miles from their homes on Jasmine Drive. A trace could easily be off by 400 meters, especially in the early hours of the morning when radio signals have less impediment.
Click to expand...

BBM

It would be very interesting to know if he used his phone during that time. We know his friend who was supposed to go hunting with him, supposedly anyway, called him cancel. And I bet he called or texted his wife at some point. If so, then LE can prove he had his phone with him.
 
Meemaw12 said:
Surprised me too.

No opening statement, don't think there's much cross exam of witnesses
(FB justice for Erin questioned Beth)
And then no cross of IM. Strange






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If you remember, from the outset, the defense opted to postpone their opening statement(another thing Joe got wrong, he said they declined to give one at all, not true) I think they also declined to question the witnesses until such point as they can give their theory of the case, so as not to reveal their strategy until that point. At least I hope that's what's going on. Be very unintelligent if it wasn't the case.
 
This was posted after a hearing for CL posted by
Heartgoesout 4-2-2015
Thread 12 1st page

When questioned outside the courtroom, Kaloyanides (Lee's attorney) said he was aware of a "significant problem" with the prosecution's case against Lee, but said this issue would not be raised during this hearing. Kaloyanides would not discuss the problem further, but said it would be "the crux of the defense."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Meemaw12 said:
This was posted after a hearing for CL posted by
Heartgoesout 4-2-2015
Thread 12 1st page

When questioned outside the courtroom, Kaloyanides (Lee's attorney) said he was aware of a "significant problem" with the prosecution's case against Lee, but said this issue would not be raised during this hearing. Kaloyanides would not discuss the problem further, but said it would be "the crux of the defense."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

On pins and needles, can wait to hear about the significant problem. Pretty sure it's going to involve Nichole.

Also what you guys think that new evidence was that cancelled the last start of the trial? Have we seen or heard it yet?
 
I agree Beth had been great and I appreciate her going to court everyday and writing about what's going on in the courtroom. She has been excellent and I have told her so.

However I will not knock Joe, we have two sources in that courtroom as far as I know. Both are doing great IMO. If you don't like what he reports don't read it simple as that.

As far as someone else having CL's phone. I guess they had his Jeep, Rifle, shells, the propane tank he borrowed from IM,DNA and whatever other evidence presented in court. Hell maybe it wasn't even CL who had the affair might be someone else. Believe what you want, me I'm sticking with the evidence testified to. This guy is going down for the heinous crime he committed against EC IMO. I can't imagine how he can climb out of this. In the end the jury will decide and I hope they get it right.

The evidence in this case is very strong if you choose to doubt or twist it to suit your theory have at it. Not me I will stick to the facts!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
77DarkHorse7 said:
If you remember, from the outset, the defense opted to postpone their opening statement(another thing Joe got wrong, he said they declined to give one at all, not true) I think they also declined to question the witnesses until such point as they can give their theory of the case, so as not to reveal their strategy until that point. At least I hope that's what's going on. Be very unintelligent if it wasn't the case.
Click to expand...

If they have a strong theory of the case, why not give it right at the start? They are going to go through all the witnesses and not cross so they don't have to spill their secret defense tactic?

[ the only reason I can think of for not coming out with it upfront, is that it is weak and would be quickly debunked by the initial witnesses and testimony]
 
Knox said:
On pins and needles, can wait to hear about the significant problem. Pretty sure it's going to involve Nichole.

Also what you guys think that new evidence was that cancelled the last start of the trial? Have we seen or heard it yet?
Click to expand...

I can't imagine what it is if it's not NL.

I have no clue about the new evidence been reading back to see if I can find out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
katydid23 said:
If they have a strong theory of the case, why not give it right at the start? They are going to go through all the witnesses and not cross so they don't have to spill their secret defense tactic?

[ the only reason I can think of for not coming out with it upfront, is that it is weak and would be quickly debunked by the initial witnesses and testimony]
Click to expand...

Thank you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This article was posted in thread 12 April 3, 2015. I think it was what was testified to at the prelim

Thought this was interesting haven't heard this before don't know if it was presented at trial

Hanke said Lee changed his story about when he had last seen Corwin, first saying that it had been a week prior to her disappearance, then in her car in her carport the morning she went missing, then seeing her parked on the dirt road where her car was found.


http://z1077fm.com/woman-was-expecting-a-proposal-christopher-lee-held-to-answer/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
moonbeams said:
Are they allowed to recall the witnesses if they don't cross now?
Click to expand...

I am not sure what the exact rules are. I know that I have seen lawyers argue in front of the judge to allow a witness to be recalled. I think you have to have a good reason to do so. And if it is a states witness, and the DT refused to do the cross then, I doubt they can have them recalled unless there is a valid reason.
 
roadrunnermt said:
And her website boasts a memorial for someone else but never was a mention about Erin.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The someone else that her website had a memorial for was a broken ceramic donkey
 
Imo. Nicole told Lee to end the relationship by any means necessary.

Because I think that Nicole knew that her finances for her kids would be ruined. Jmo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 111 more.
Total: 3,278 (members: 112, guests: 3,166)

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
3,166
Total visitors
3,278
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
595,612
Messages
18,028,032
Members
229,704
Latest member
MarthaPrirl
Back
Top