GUILTY UT - Michele MacNeill, 50, found dead in bathtub, Pleasant Grove, 11 April 2007 - #7

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hope4More said:
Yes he did. Mimicked her voice , her statement that she couldn't handle looking at blood. She was talking about seeing her mother's bloody clothes in the garage, the same day her mother DIED!
Click to expand...

Nice. No matter what else, I guarantee that the jury felt sympathy for her. No matter what, none of this was her fault. To mock her is disgusting, and stupid (from a strategic standpoint).
 
I am exhausted from listening/watching Spencer. Feel like I have been sitting for a ADHD child. :lol:
 
Hope4More said:
Putting on my juror hat. After we all sat down and got going I'd do a chart --yes he did it, no, hasn't been proven. Off the top of my head the only item I would put under no is that the death wasn't definitely ruled a murder. Reasoning from that starting point. Was motive proven-yes. Did he have time enough to kill her-yes. He acted strangely all day why is that? Did he have the knowledge to kill her without leaving conclusive evidence? Yes, and not because an inmate said so. He was a DR. He had looked up whatever in the PDR just before her death.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt , let's say he didn't try to kill her, she ended up in the tub by accident. Did he do everything he could as a DR and a husband to try to save her? No. Best case he didn't try very hard. Worst case, he actively interfered with the attempts of others to help her.

His behavior was bizarre at the hospital, but that's not evidence. Right after returning home tho, for a fact he involved others in throwing away all her drugs, and in throwing many of her belongings into the garage. Whould an innocent person do this? Um...No. would a grieving husband do this? No. Would a DR trained in how to handle death scenes do this? No.

He's guilty of obstruction of justice. Would an innocent person deliberately try to conceal a crime scene? No.

I vote guilty on both charges. Throw the book at him, judge. Just IMO.
Click to expand...

BBM. Exactly. This to me is the crux. Pretend he had never decided to be pro-active and murder her. Pretend he never forced her into the surgery nor "ordered up" that cocktail of meds and all the other evidence of premeditation that abounds. His inaction and active obstruction after the fact are enough to show he did not value her life and did not intervene in any meaningful way to save her. :jail:
 
Bravo said:
So it seems Michele was in really lousy health. Constipated to boot. Jacked herself up on all those drugs. Drew a bath and fell in. Alrighty then :banghead:
Click to expand...

--------
Bravo please! OMG I am cracking up and this isnt funny! Maybe he's hoping someone will give Him a cure for it. :floorlaugh: :laughcry:
 
Oh thank you prosecutor for pointing out that what defense just said is not evidence.
 
OK, I listened to Spencer with eyes closed lest his facial expressions and mannerisms would negatively influence my opinion. I think he scored a couple reasonable doubt points with M.E.'s report., but otherwise the closing, imo, was hurky jerky. Nothing he said influenced me of MM's innocence.
 
renatae said:
Re: the pants. I'm one who thinks he was undressed her after Ava saw her in order to make it more believable that she was attempting to bathe and fell. However, I'm also thinking that one of his ulterior motives may have been to have her in a humiliating condition during the efforts of neighbors and responders. He really seems to have hated her that much.
Click to expand...

I've thought the same thing. He did it to humiliate her. Same spitting on the
dead gesture as choosing the murder date for his faux marriage. " Wedding " anniversaries thus doubled as celebrations of Michelle's death. It doesn't get any sicker or more hateful than that.
 
Aw crud - the WAT feed reset, so I missed the last 30-45 minutes of Spencer's close. Listening to the Perkins rebuttal now, so I'm current again.
 
Liking the beginning of this rebuttal.
 
Thundar said:
This defense closing is like a switch and bait.....I was thinking I would hear actual evidence to disbute what the state brought forth instead I am hearing how every single prosecution witness lied. I realize that a certain percentage of a defnese's case is trying to get the jury to see through some lies, but not every single witness. I don't think defense has left any witness out of the lie train, has he?
Click to expand...

*BBM*

Gypsy.
At least I do not recall him disputing anything she said.
Kind of makes you wonder about that deal she cut with the State, hmmm?
 
Classic example of a poor attorney. Even if he wins this case (I don't live in Utah, so I have no feel for the community) this is not who you want on a serious case.

A lot of criminals appeal to this kind of attorney, the lower ranking crimes, as they think the lawyer should lie for them. Never good, they end up with more time.

This is why defense attorneys have bad names. Not all are like this. Nor are the good ones.

First and foremost should be a basic understanding of law, not ego games. Then comes the brilliance of figuring out how to handle a case truthfully, and in the best manner possible. I have so much more to say, but it will come out with the current anger so I cannot.
 
Glad to see this State's attorney.....he has great presentation

and I do like his tie :blushing:
 
In thinking about it, the defense didn't really need to call an ME because their claim is the original ME got it right.

Perkins is covering good stuff in rebuttal, starting with Spencer's fudging of numbers and assumptions.
 
Bet'cha Marty is sitting there glad he didn't actually pay money for that defense he got
 
Does rebuttle have a time limit? It appears prosecution is just trying to point out the misconceptions that defense just presented to the jury.
 
scorekeeper said:
Glad to see this State's attorney.....he has great presentation

and I do like his tie :blushing:
Click to expand...

I like that he is pointing out the amount of "speculation" in defense's closing.
 
Anyone want to guess if this gets done today? At this point, I think quick deliberations would be very bad for the defendant, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 87 more.
Total: 2,991 (members: 88, guests: 2,903)

Online statistics

Members online
88
Guests online
2,903
Total visitors
2,991
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,188
Messages
17,964,841
Members
228,714
Latest member
hannahdunnam
Back
Top