BBM
Of course they are all lumped together.
Once again this is George's trial. What Jake, Billy and Angie did doesn't mean a hill of beans to the jury, because this is George's jury, his trial. The prosecution can prove Jake, Billy and Angie were in the planning, execution and cover up all year long, but the jury is not even going to consider the evidence against anyone but George.
All the jury has to believe is George went along, lumped along, with his dad and brother, and was at the murder scenes.
That's the problem, the prosecution has not presented any evidence he went along, lumped along or was even in the state of Ohio when the other 3 planned, carried out and covered up the murders.
That is what I am waiting for. Real evidence against George. Not what Jake said, not what Angie said, not some shoe evidence that the state expert admitted that they couldn't prove George wore or ever saw, not some maybe truthful story by Jake that George was there, not some half baked story George went with Jake and Angie to buy a truck from a cousin and not some blurry shots of some headlights and tail lights of vehicles that could have been driven by a couple of early morning turkey hunters.
Right now they have him on MAYBE obstruction of justice. That's all I see RIGHT NOW. Maybe later on they will get to some evidence against just him alone, because that is what it is going to take to convict him of anything.
I cannot pin my hopes on the proffers by Jake or Angie. Half of what Angie said is hearsay, that she said the men told her after they returned. That will be thrown out. She can testify to the shoes she bought but has already went on record saying she threw them away because the boys didn't like them. One of the BCI Agents testified they put all 4 W's in separate rooms to be interviewed at the border. When questioned about the shoes in separate interviews from each other and Angie, both Jake and George denied they ever saw those shoes.
And Jake admitted he killed 5, shot 1 and Billy killed 3.
AC said there are inconsistencies with the evidence the state has in Jake's story. In fact during one motion she said Jake told several different stories. How are we supposed to pin any hope on that? That's like a 16 year old boy when asked where he was all night. I was at Tom's house. Ok I'll call Tom's mom. No wait I was at Dick's house. Then I will call Dick's mom. No wait I was really at Harry's house. Then I will call Harry's mom. No wait I really had amnesia and don't remember where I was last night. Good luck on getting the to the truth.
That's how I feel about Jake's story. Repositioned Hannah's body so the baby could nurse. Major BS. He didn't give a FHF about that baby or if it starved to death. If he did he wouldn't have killed the baby's mother and especially not in the dark with that same baby in bed with her. An old friend once said "Bullets don't have eyes." And several people have told me a .22 bullet could have went though her body and hit the baby and killed it.
Sorry I just don't believe anything Jake said.
JMO
