TN TN - Karen Swift, 44, Dyersburg, 30 Oct 2011 - #3

[Some1Nose]

I imagine the "a lot of evidence" is circumstantial.

snipped by me for relevance

I ran across the following and thought I'd share:

"Books, movies, and television often perpetuate the belief that circumstantial evidence may not be used to convict a criminal of a crime. But this view is incorrect. In many cases, circumstantial evidence is the only evidence linking an accused to a crime; direct evidence may simply not exist. As a result, the jury may have only circumstantial evidence to consider in determining whether to convict or acquit a person charged with a crime. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "circumstantial evidence is intrinsically no different from testimonial [direct] evidence"(Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 75 S. Ct. 127, 99 L. Ed. 150 [1954]). Thus, the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence has little practical effect in the presentation or admissibility of evidence in trials."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Circumstantial+Evidence

 

[neesaki]

Good points - I imagine the "a lot of evidence" is circumstantial, and the sheriff knows a high-power att.
will try to plant all sorts of doubt... sometimes I think a professional jury would be better, more astute for such cases, but that a debate unto itself.

At least hope for a much, much smarter jury than in the Casey Anthony trial.

 

[cocomod]

I am in shock and amazement that there is still not an arrest in Karen's case. It saddens me so to see her thread so far down. This should NOT be a cold case. She was found relatively soon, and they have indicated many times that there is forensic evidence!! Darn-it! I want justice for Karen. I am NOT a patient person.

Still here, still waiting for justice for Karen.

 

[Tugela]

Below is my post about my nephews murder that I posted long ago.. the Atty of who I SPEAK OF BELOW is the Atty Karen's husband has retained.. Steve Farese.

And you based this on what your relative told you was going on? Did it occur to you that maybe you were hearing one side of the story only? You would have no idea what happened behind closed doors other than what he told you.

A strategy of self defence generally places the onus of reasonable proof on the person making the claim, so I don't think that no evidence to that effect was raised in court.

 

[Tugela]

I am in shock and amazement that there is still not an arrest in Karen's case. It saddens me so to see her thread so far down. This should NOT be a cold case. She was found relatively soon, and they have indicated many times that there is forensic evidence!! Darn-it! I want justice for Karen. I am NOT a patient person.

Still here, still waiting for justice for Karen.

Forensic evidence doesn't mean that it leads to a suspect. They can have a mountain of evidence, but if it doesn't point to anyone in particular it doesn't help them much.

 

[cocomod]

Forensic evidence doesn't mean that it leads to a suspect. They can have a mountain of evidence, but if it doesn't point to anyone in particular it doesn't help them much.

Maybe not, but the fact that he is "certain" that there will be an arrest tells me that he must have SOME idea who the POI is. :moo:

 

[cocomod]

And you based this on what your relative told you was going on? Did it occur to you that maybe you were hearing one side of the story only? You would have no idea what happened behind closed doors other than what he told you.

A strategy of self defence generally places the onus of reasonable proof on the person making the claim, so I don't think that no evidence to that effect was raised in court.

This attorney's reputation has been earned for good reason - IMO. The tactics and lies that were told in the trial of the minister's wife are only one good example. He is not above allowing his client to lie in court in order to get them off. He is - in my book - very comnparable to Baez. He takes great pride in getting his client off no matter the cost to the victim or the victim's family.

 

[OldSteve]

Saw a show on Dateline the other night in which a wife was found dead in her bathroom by her husband. She had what LE described as finger marks on her neck and cause of death was strangulation IIRC.
Husband was charged, tried, and found not guilty, he had a very good defense team.
Couldn't help but think of KS's case, (though not similar event-wise) in that it is not that easy for LE when evidence is not a slam-dunk..

 

[panthera]

Saw a show on Dateline the other night in which a wife was found dead in her bathroom by her husband. She had what LE described as finger marks on her neck and cause of death was strangulation IIRC.
Husband was charged, tried, and found not guilty, he had a very good defense team.
Couldn't help but think of KS's case, (though not similar event-wise) in that it is not that easy for LE when evidence is not a slam-dunk..

BBM

Especially more so when the victim isn't found at home, but rather at a remote location, and her car is found alongside the road with a flat tire. The exact COD hasn't been released either, and if there was bloodshed, where was she murdered if there is no blood evidence in the house or her vehicle? However, the husband still remains at the top of my list as far as suspects unless there is some proof that Karen left the house on her own that early morning. Whether he is or isn't guilty remains to be seen but knowing an arrest could be imminent it is wise to have a good criminal defense attorney.

MOO

 

[bznbear]

This attorney's reputation has been earned for good reason - IMO. The tactics and lies that were told in the trial of the minister's wife are only one good example. He is not above allowing his client to lie in court in order to get them off. He is - in my book - very comnparable to Baez. He takes great pride in getting his client off no matter the cost to the victim or the victim's family.

If I were the DA, I'd be talking to Jeff Ashton and the DA that prosecuted Mary Winkler to see what mistakes they think they made and any advice they could offer.

 

[Tugela]

This attorney's reputation has been earned for good reason - IMO. The tactics and lies that were told in the trial of the minister's wife are only one good example. He is not above allowing his client to lie in court in order to get them off. He is - in my book - very comnparable to Baez. He takes great pride in getting his client off no matter the cost to the victim or the victim's family.

There are two comments to make here.

Firstly, in order for a client to lie in court, they have to take the stand. If they are lieing, the DA has the opportunity to expose that. It is rare for the accused to take the stand however. And in any case, the accused saying something under oath doesn't count for much without corroboration.

Secondly, the defence has a responsibility to point out alternative scenarios that could fit the facts as presented in court. They don't have to prove those scenarios, they just have to show that there are alternate explanations.

The American justice system is based on the presumption of innocence. The prosecution has the onus of proof. The defence only has to establish reasonable doubt, which they do by presenting alternative scenarios to the one the state presents and which is consistent with the facts entered into evidence. They are not required to present new evidence to support the alternative scenario, but it should be consistent with the evidence the prosecution presented. If they do this successfully then reasonable doubt has been established and a jury (assuming they are performing their role properly) should acquit. This is how American justice works in theory, but, as we all know, this doesn't allways happen the way it supposed to.

This is what Baez did in the Anthony trial and it is what any and every competent defence attorney will do. If you are ever involved in a trial and your attorney doesn't do this, fire them, because they are not doing their job.

 

[Fishee]

Secondly, the defence has a responsibility to point out alternative scenarios that could fit the facts as presented in court.

Incorrect. They have no such responsibility.

Technically, the defense doesn't have to put on a case at all.

You're confusing what a good defense attorney should do as opposed to what s/he's required to do.

 

[~n/t~]

Still nothing, eh? Wow.

 

[Tugela]

Incorrect. They have no such responsibility.

Technically, the defense doesn't have to put on a case at all.

You're confusing what a good defense attorney should do as opposed to what s/he's required to do.

It is still their responsibility to do that. That doesn't mean they have to do that, being incompetent isn't illegal.

 

[Some1Nose]

Bumping for Karen...

Is this going to be, yet, another case where it takes years for an arrest???

If the perp has a semblance of a conscience...Let's hope it hounds him/her to do the Right thing and admit their culpability; turn themselves in! No matter the circumstances, Karen did not deserve the consequences!

 

[otto]

Bumping for Karen...

Is this going to be, yet, another case where it takes years for an arrest???

If the perp has a semblance of a conscience...Let's hope it hounds him/her to do the Right thing and admit their culpability; turn themselves in! No matter the circumstances, Karen did not deserve the consequences!

That's what it looked like from the beginning. It looked like it might be the husband because of cell phone pings, clothing and car locations. When she was found, it looked even more like the husband because she was so close to home, but so well hidden. She was last seen in her own home, wearing pajamas and sleeping with her daughter. The problem with the husband is that she was leaving him and taking their daughters, she was afraid and it was very acrimonious. She had applied for divorce but was kind of stuck in terms of providing a home for her daughters because the divorce process is very slow in Tennessee. She had no where to stay that night and so she stayed in the house with her daughters - who were supposed to be at a sleepover. Whatever plans Karen had at the event she attended were interrupted when her daughter ate too much halloween candy and had to come home.

It looks like police don't have much of a case, so it could take a long time.

Wasn't DNA found?

 

[panthera]

Bumping for Karen...

Is this going to be, yet, another case where it takes years for an arrest???

If the perp has a semblance of a conscience...Let's hope it hounds him/her to do the Right thing and admit their culpability; turn themselves in! No matter the circumstances, Karen did not deserve the consequences!

The biggest problem, in my opinion, is if there is no evidence of someone else having driven her car (to establish who the perpetrator is) and if there is evidence of a crime occurring in it, which would lead away from her husband and more to her having left the house on her own that early morning.



MOO

 

[otto]

The biggest problem, in my opinion, is if there is no evidence of someone else having driven her car (to establish who the perpetrator is) and if there is evidence of a crime occurring in it, which would lead away from her husband and more to her having left the house on her own that early morning.



MOO

I'm willing to bet that it was a soft kill and that there is no evidence of murder in the car. The guy that found the car only mentioned a slashed tire. I suspect he would have mentioned blood if there was any ... or signs of a struggle. I think that Karen was murdered at home.

 

[Darcyline]

I think they found DNA, but it was her husband's. Therefore, easily explained by living together. Even if they found his semen on her he could just say we were still having consensual sex every once in awhile and that is believable.

That is my feeling about this case. Unfortunately, jurors need basically a video tape of a murder happening to convict now so I can see why they haven't moved forward even if they strongly suspect him (or someone else).

 

[otto]

I think they found DNA, but it was her husband's. Therefore, easily explained by living together. Even if they found his semen on her he could just say we were still having consensual sex every once in awhile and that is believable.

That is my feeling about this case. Unfortunately, jurors need basically a video tape of a murder happening to convict now so I can see why they haven't moved forward even if they strongly suspect him (or someone else).

Exactly. We know that DNA was found, but if it belonged to her husband, any defence lawyer would argue that it could have gotten there through normal interactions while living in the same house. What we do know is that DNA that was collected from Karen's body does not seem to point in the direction of a stranger.