CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - *Arrest* #66

Status
Not open for further replies.
There really is nothing to debate. I posted a link to support my opinion.

I'm not sure who needs a link to know that flushing paper towels could "possibly" clog a toilet (and I'm sure prisoners are really concerned about this) but the OP's point was writing something on toilet paper, napkins and paper towels and then getting it wet will destroy the writing. Common sense and life experience tells us that. No link needed.
 
What I find stunning is he didn't answer with a yes or no, which is required.
He said: "I will remain silent."
In statement analysis this is extremely telling.
He didn't speak up on facebook looking for her.
He didn't speak about what should be put on on a posters and put them out everywhere.
He didn't speak loving words at KB's candlelight vigil.
He didn't speak up to Cheryl and Daryl to form search parties.
He didn't speak to media begging them to pick up Kelsys missing case.
He didn't speak up at the press conference begging a kidnapper to bring Kelsey home.
He didn't speak to Media when leaving an attorney's office, when all the cameras were there, for him to beg a kidnapper to bring Kelsey home.
He still remains silent...
Yet thank goodness he appears to be verbose when it comes to penning evil plans to paper towels. They need to throw away the key on this sicko. How many of us will be surprised when years from now he is caught trying to orchestrate a hit on people associated with this trial? I think this man will live with revenge fantasies 24/7.
 
Yet thank goodness he appears to be verbose when it comes to penning evil plans to paper towels. They need to throw away the key on this sicko. How many of us will be surprised when years from now he is caught trying to orchestrate a hit on people associated with this trial? I think this man will live with revenge fantasies 24/7.
… in my best Hank Hill voice.. agreed! "that boy ain't right" :D
 
BBM. Yes we do know that the defense was not able to convince the judge. iow, the defense OBJECTED to it. My response was to a poster who claimed the defense didn't object to the 'paper' towel witness.

JMO
The poster was referring to the defense not objecting during the witness testimony in open court.

What blows my mind is the absurdity of the huge request.

he is not offering any upfront expense money. But he gives him a long wish list of people to kill---
an entire family, including young children, a rancher and his wife, an FBI agent, and they span thousands of miles, but PF expects his prison buddy to accomplish this somehow? And with no money upfront, no real cash incentive....just a vague ' will pay whatever' ....

"oh, and I'm not guilty or anything, I just want these 10 people dead. thanks"
Oh I know. It was just like, "I have no money but I can tell you a cash cow to kidnap or rob and you can just take your payment from that. The sky is the limit.... within reason."
 
I'm not sure who needs a link to know that flushing paper towels could "possibly" clog a toilet (and I'm sure prisoners are really concerned about this) but the OP's point was writing something on toilet paper, napkins and paper towels and then getting it wet will destroy the writing. Common sense and life experience tells us that. No link needed.

Makes me think of the defense team making something of nothing when they talk about John Doe and his credibility, and spend so much time on that when in actuality, it doesn't matter at all. It is just white noise that should be completely ignored by the jury. It takes time and focus off the real issue, trying to deminimize its importance.

As stated above, the important thing is the fact of the matter that he wrote what was on the paper and what the content of what he wrote and its implications.

Whether the paper can get wet and what happens to the paper, is not really at all important to this case, and I don't think the jury is going to be discussing such in deliberations.
 
If that is true, I think the defense and the prosecution would be vigorously trying to negotiate a plea deal this weekend. We'll see if that happens.

A good reason not to negotiate a plea deal would be because the defense knows there is no forensic proof PF wrote them.

JMO
Plea dea? No plea deal. Too late - his goose is cooked. The evidence is overwhelming that this is a murderous, vengeance filled sociopath who not only deserves to pay dearly for his senseless and brutal crimes but is clearly likely to re-offend if given half a chance (heck, if given a pen and some toilet paper!). This jury lives in his county. I am willing to bet not a one wants to see him walking their streets again. Patrick makes Chris Watts look almost humane in comparison - no easy feat. They will both thankfully die in prison, where they belong. MOO.
 
Will the transcript be posted here?

As to a transcript of the entire proceedings, I don't know about that because the media would have to pay for each page transcribed by the court reporter to get it. For some cases, the media will get together and share the cost to do such, and then release it piecemeal to get the clicks. I don't think the transcript question has been posed to Sam.. yet,

As to evidence and interviews etc.
With the Chris Watts documents, they gave links for the media to download. And then we had links here to read things.

Iirc, Sam discussed this on his Facebook one night. He wasn't sure if things will be released as quickly as with the Watts case. There was no trial for that case. He also was not sure if the release of evidence will be as complete as the Watts case was.
 
As to a transcript of the file, I don't know about that because the media would have to pay for each page transcribed by the court reporter to get it. For some cases, the media will get together and share the cost to do such, and then release it piecemeal to get the clicks. I don't think the transcript question has been posed to Sam.. yet,

As to evidence and interviews etc.
With the Chris Watts documents, they gave links for the media to download. And then we had links here to read things.

Iirc, Sam discussed this on his Facebook one night. He wasn't sure if things will be released as quickly as with the Watts case. There was no trial for that case. He also was not sure if the release of evidence will be as complete as the Watts case was.

The Watts case spoiled us all in that respect. It moved at lightning speed and we got basically everything in the document dump soon after.
 
What amazes me is how he got them out of the jail. You would think there would have been a process of paperwork going out of the prison and would have been checked.

Then again, Jodi Arias tried to get notes out with her magazine and Juan just happened to be there to catch that the notes were on different pages.
I guess they're not as concerned about checking prisoners' pants when they leave as they are when they're checking in.

Hope the prosecution folks wore gloves!
 
Last edited:
Agent Slater testified he is not a handwriting "expert" so what exactly was the defense supposed to question?

What is very telling to me is that there was no attempt by the prosecution to authenticate the letters either with a handwriting "expert" or with finger prints. Wouldn't it be easier for the defense to remind the jury of this lack of forensic evidence in closing?

JMO
Actually, what is very telling to me is that there was no attempt by the defense to call their own expert witness, either a handwriting "expert" or someone who could exclude PF's finger prints. Wouldn't it be easier for the defense to present experts who would cast a shadow of reasonable doubt on the prosecution's claims? jmo.
 
I don't believe PF requested the guy do anything at all.

JMO
I am confused. It was not a request when he said he wanted a bullet in KB’s head and for her face to be the object of defecation? Is that just normal prison banter between two alleged criminals? Perhaps mere locker room talk?

I don’t believe the jury will see it that way. They have to live in that county after this trial - we don’t. MOO
 
I reread SF2's testimony as a brother and witness at his family's Thanksgiving and don't understand what he could have "traded" with the DA to leave SF out of the trial.

Questions were asked and answered and he didn't tell the DA what to ask him. I believe SF2 simply told the truth to the best of his recollection.

I don't think SF was called to testify because her attorney told the court at the preliminary she would assert her 5th Amendment to any questions, and the prosecution was able to answer their questions (i.e., the fire and PF's arrival time on Thanksgiving) without her. I don't think it had anything to do with SF2-- his life difficult enough as it is serving in the same District. MOO
You are probably right.

I didn't mean too imply anything nefarious on SF2's part. Just wondering if he agreed to be fully cooperative and to state the facts, even though some are not helpful for his brother's defense, but would ask them to leave his mother off the stand.

I am probably wrong. It's just a nagging feeling that I had, but there is no evidence to show it to be true.
 
Agent Slater testified he is not a handwriting "expert" so what exactly was the defense supposed to question?

What is very telling to me is that there was no attempt by the prosecution to authenticate the letters either with a handwriting "expert" or with finger prints. Wouldn't it be easier for the defense to remind the jury of this lack of forensic evidence in closing?

JMO

Maybe you're right. Maybe the defense thought the jury couldn't possibly believe their client, who is accused of murder among other things, had written these letters so they will just ignore it.
 
You are probably right.

I didn't mean too imply anything nefarious on SF2's part. Just wondering if he agreed to be fully cooperative and to state the facts, even though some are not helpful for his brother's defense, but would ask them to leave his mother off the stand.

I am probably wrong. It's just a nagging feeling that I had, but there is no evidence to show it to be true.
Yeah, I can't imagine SF2 having any bargaining power if his mother committed a crime.
 
IDK. I'm totally guessing on all of this, just trying to figure out what they will try. The defense case is terribly weak, but they have to do something. I think all of us on WS know there are some weak points (eta: in the prosecution's case) that the defense will try to magnify, but they (eta: the defense) haven't been able to effectively refute any of the evidence against PF so far. The closing statement is their last hurrah.
 
Last edited:
IDK. I'm totally guessing on all of this, just trying to figure out what they will try. The defense case is terribly weak, but they have to do something. I think all of us on WS know there are some weak points that the defense will try to magnify, but they haven't been able to effectively refute any of the evidence against PF so far. The closing statement is their last hurrah.

I think your post above was a very good guess as to what they are going to do. I just still don't know how they have met the expectations of what they said at their opening statements, when they said that it was not done in the condo. But it was done elsewhere. What can they say in closing statements about that is what I'm trying to wrap my head around.
 
As to a transcript of the entire proceedings, I don't know about that because the media would have to pay for each page transcribed by the court reporter to get it. For some cases, the media will get together and share the cost to do such, and then release it piecemeal to get the clicks. I don't think the transcript question has been posed to Sam.. yet,

As to evidence and interviews etc.
With the Chris Watts documents, they gave links for the media to download. And then we had links here to read things.

Iirc, Sam discussed this on his Facebook one night. He wasn't sure if things will be released as quickly as with the Watts case. There was no trial for that case. He also was not sure if the release of evidence will be as complete as the Watts case was.
I think what Sam said was that his station didn't go the transcript route because a professional court reporter would have cost $3,000/day he explained. I will never understand why the media outlets didn't band together and use their collective resources to fund a court reporter as it seems like that might have allowed the reporters to report vs doing their best with challenging acoustics and seating to get as many details as they could. All this being said, reporters such as Sam and others were creative and inventive and used social media platforms to deliver the messages from the street, hotel rooms and inside cars to share information and it worked well IMO given the limitations imposed by the Court.
 
I think your post above was a very good guess as to what they are going to do. I just still don't know how they have met the expectations of what they said at their opening statements, when they said that it was not done in the condo. But it was done elsewhere. What can they say in closing statements about that is what I'm trying to wrap my head around.
That's the big question. Will they postulate a location of the murder or just say that there's no evidence of all the blood in the condo? That's definitely weak sauce IMO. I think they may try to stick with KB ran away, which would be foolish.
MOO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
213
Guests online
2,787
Total visitors
3,000

Forum statistics

Threads
592,233
Messages
17,965,562
Members
228,729
Latest member
PoignantEcho
Back
Top