I've spent the past few days reading what's been posted and reflecting on this horrible crime. The wheels of justice are kind of in a holding pattern on this case for now, waiting up to the prelim or whatever they call it. IF Chris' attorney waives the prelim, we won't find out any further details of what the pros has until trial. But if the hearing goes on as scheduled, we may find out more. Many of the *rumors* of what transpired have shown to be true, either flat out true or in some form.
From what I gathered in reading the SW's, and it has been a few days since so my memory may be wrong, Chris was served with a SW the same morning Sheri and the boys were found murdered. IIRC, the SW was for his dna, body scrapes and scratches, hands ie fingernails, and I also believe his clothes were taken from the hospital and his vehicle was impounded from the home and taken in for inspection. A local could confirm the car was taken away by LE. (they put them on those tow trucks, usually, where the vehicle is placed up on a trailer) Anyway, I believe that particular SW was timed at 11:58 a.m. May 5, 2009.
As there was a signed SW, I don't believe Chris' Miranda Rights are going to be in question. The attorney can try, *attack the law,* but it isn't going to fly by a judge, IMO.
We've heard it *rumored* that Chris MAY have used his own computer to type up the threats. It remains to be seen if this is in fact true; however, I tend to believe that is most likely the case (because most of what we've heard rumored turned up true) LE did state they believe the 'threats' were manufactured by Chris himself.
So what is a def attorney to do? Not guilty is a given, but,..........what's the game plan? Especially IF the threats come from his own computer? Insanity is out, IMHO. They'll NEVER convince a judge, much less a jury this guy is nuts. The threats were over too long of a period of time............premediation is evident by the build up of the threats over time.
What is ironic is, these threats may have been made up by Chris just to scare Sheri into not going on her mission this summer or manipulate her in some way or who knows what and MAYBE NOT to necessarily kill her. But then the game plan for Chris may have changed once Sheri possibly found out he was having an affair. His actions now CAN point to premeditation and be his own undoing.
The last threat was ominous........THIS IS MY LAST WARNING...........or something to that effect. Something about.......YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE.....
What could be the worst nightmare? My :twocents: is the def is going to work on that angle..........YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE
What could be worse than killing everyone in your family?...... IMHO, killing everyone in your family and setting up you to be the one who did the crime!
Def attorneys have to be creative. Even as ridiculous as it may sound to us, this is, IMHO, a POSSIBLE scenario for this def. You'd be surprised what juries will buy. As much as we believe it's about as close to a slam dunk as we've seen, there's no guarantee........UNLESS, LE has a smoking gun,..........like the rope or whatever found along the highway actually has the victim's dna as well as the perps, something that irrevocably connects THIS accused to these murders and NO ONE ELSE. SODDI, IMO, is still on the table for this def.
Although I realize the def may be reading here and may not have thought of this, it's ok. Because the pros may be reading here as well and this could be a heads-up of what they need to PREVENT even one juror believing this scenario. The pros needs to have that HOOK.
JMHO
fran
PS.......fwiw, a jury in Texas found a guy not guilty of murdering a neighbor, although the guy admitted he shot him twice,(I believe). The def claimed 'self-defense.' It didn't matter that the accused, after shooting the victim multiple times proceeded to cut the victim up and place his body in trash bags and put them in the bay. It didn't matter that the accused went back to the scene and removed the victim's head (which was never found). One of the juror's statements on why he found the guy 'not guilty?' He didn't think you could convict someone of murder if the victim didn't have a head.
