Post verdict discussion of evidence

Status
Not open for further replies.
Please don't bring discussion from other sites here. Also, please do not sleuth people on the edges of this case. Brad has had his trial, he has been convicted. I understand that some agree with the conviction and some do not. That's okay. Talk about the evidence, talk about the witnesses that testified in court, talk about the strategy of either the prosecution or the defense - BUT DO NOT TALK ABOUT INNOCENT PEOPLE.

It doesn't matter anymore if BC has a love interest. It doesn't matter anymore because Brad has been convicted. When this goes to appeal, what will be reviewed is what happened IN court, unless new evidence becomes available. That's it.

Thanks,

Salem
 
BC won't be able to argue incompetent defense since he got a very vigorous defense by two attorneys.

I think the odds are very slim that the CoA will overturn the conviction. The public saw the judge make calls against the defense, and many people feel like that was unfair, but that doesn't necessarily mean JG's rulings were legally incorrect. Appellate judges don't consider feelings of unfairness. If JG's rulings were legally sound and followed the law and the established rules, then the appeal will be denied. Wonder if K & T are prepared to take this case all the way up to the supreme court?
 
I don't think those guys are taking the case anywhere. I think it goes over to appellate counsel now.
 
I don't think those guys are taking the case anywhere. I think it goes over to appellate counsel now.

I gotta think K will stay on in some capacity...he's so invested in this case already.
 
Personally, I'm not sure if the jurors are *ever* gonna speak publically about this case. I think at this point, they're just waiting for it to die down and go away.

Not slamming them. Just thinking if I were one of the them, that might be what I was hoping for right now.
 
I hope they'll talk about the case when Dateline does their story. I always like that part--where you hear the jury's thoughts on cases. This jury was a cross section and I think 3 races were represented, from what I could tell (white, black, hispanic).
 
I hope they'll talk about the case when Dateline does their story. I always like that part--where you hear the jury's thoughts on cases. This jury was a cross section and I think 3 races were represented, from what I could tell (white, black, hispanic).

I wonder how long till Dateline does it, I looked it up.. nothing yet.. I bet I will miss it!
 
It takes Dateline quite awhile to get a story together and then on the air. Maybe 6 months to a year, depending on the story. Sometimes they'll follow a case for many years till it has an outcome.
 
...is the groups of people that have formed, and one that appears, IMHO, to be missing.

There is, of course, the BDI (Brad Did It), who were BDI from the moment they heard she was missing. And, to a degree, rightfully so, since one is more likely to be killed by someone you know than by a complete stranger, statistically.

There is the BII (Brad Is Innocent) folks, and on THEIR side, I will say that this is how we are ALL supposed to feel due to our system of innocent until proven guilty. In the interest of disclosure, I am a member of this group.

There is the BDIWTEDMSBII (Brad Did It, Wait, The Evidence Doesn't Make Sense, Brad Is Innocent)

Then there is the NSIHDIBTTWH (Not Sure If He Did It, But The Trial Was Hokey), and they present their own compelling beliefs.

What appears to be missing is the ITHIBATTITHG (I Think He's Innocent, But After The Trial, I Think He's Guilty). There does not seem to be a group that went in thinking he was innocent, but after being shown the evidence, became convinced he was guilty. And the abscence of those people in a forum as large as this, makes me wonder if anyone like that was present on the jury.

:twocents:
 
It takes Dateline quite awhile to get a story together and then on the air. Maybe 6 months to a year, depending on the story. Sometimes they'll follow a case for many years till it has an outcome.

The Ryan Widmer story came out in about 2 months but it was sort of a remake with the new ending as a result of the new trial. He was found guilty in his third trial on February 15th.
 
Respectfully snipped...

What appears to be missing is the ITHIBATTITHG (I Think He's Innocent, But After The Trial, I Think He's Guilty). There does not seem to be a group that went in thinking he was innocent, but after being shown the evidence, became convinced he was guilty. And the abscence of those people in a forum as large as this, makes me wonder if anyone like that was present on the jury.

:twocents:

Great observation. In theory, everyone on the jury should is the ITHIBATTITHG camp, right?? The defense (during voir dire before trial) was presumably comfortable everyone in the jury was in the 'presumed innocent' camp, and obviously, after trial, we know where the jury (each of them) stands...

As for why there's not more in that group apparent here, I guess possible explanations might include strong pre-trial bias in many, the fact that most here haven't seen everything first hand that the jury has. It's also possible that the ITHIBATTITHG exists here (observes), but just doesn't do much posting.
 
Great observation. In theory, everyone on the jury should is the ITHIBATTITHG camp, right?? The defense (during voir dire before trial) was presumably comfortable everyone in the jury was in the 'presumed innocent' camp, and obviously, after trial, we know where the jury (each of them) stands...

As for why there's not more in that group apparent here, I guess possible explanations might include strong pre-trial bias in many, the fact that most here haven't seen everything first hand that the jury has. It's also possible that the ITHIBATTITHG exists here (observes), but just doesn't do much posting.

I would HOPE that the 12 jurors were in that group, just interesting in that such a group does not seem to be vocal here.
 
I would HOPE that the 12 jurors were in that group, just interesting in that such a group does not seem to be vocal here.

I'm quite comfortable having gone into this thinking he was guilty on the front end, and believing the jury made the right decision on the back end. Not being on the jury myself, I wasn't compelled in any way to believe he was innocent. Not being on a jury, it wasn't up to me to personally uphold our concepts of justice. Once someone is on trial for murder and has been indicted by a grand jury, its quite logical to accept the possibility of guilt. I don't think the American notion of justice includes believing in innocence no matter what is put before you to the contrary, and plenty of things to the contrary were out there before the trial ever started.
 
I was one who felt BC was guilty from early on. But I didn't start out that way and it took me perhaps a week to come to that conclusion. I've watched enough cases to spot the same MO. But I've also learned to sit back and wait before jumping into the husband-did-it camp. The trial is the final word.

Of course, up until the defendent was convicted, there's always the chance he is innocent. That's why we use the words 'alleged' and 'possible' and 'accused.' That's why the defendent is given his day in court.

I'm not above changing my mind. Even when I followed the Laci Peterson case, I even posted here on the pages of Websleuths, that I 'felt' he did it but if the def could prove him innocent, I'd accept that. I really would have too! neverhappened!

What we post here on the pages of Webslueths is just OUR OPINION. None of us is going to be called for jury duty. IF we were, it wouldn't take the defense long to see we've participated here and have us dismissed. They specifically looked for posters on the internet in the Peterson trial. Seriously, they did.

I'd also like to believe that almost everyone else posting on this forum would have admitted they were wrong had BC been found 'not guilty.' Of course they may still believe him guilty, but they'd have NO CHOICE but to go by the courts. Even IF he were guilty and found innocent, he'd be set free and never retried. That's also the luxury this convicted murderer has, he has his appeals. So there is still that HOPE for those that believe he didn't to find some nit-pick error in the trial to demand a new trial. That's about all they have now, but it's still HOPE he'll get off.

Too bad Nancy doesn't have the same luxury. She was tried, convicted and executed by a jury of one, without seeing one day in court. :(

JMHO, of course,
fran
 
...is the groups of people that have formed, and one that appears, IMHO, to be missing.

There is, of course, the BDI (Brad Did It), who were BDI from the moment they heard she was missing. And, to a degree, rightfully so, since one is more likely to be killed by someone you know than by a complete stranger, statistically.

There is the BII (Brad Is Innocent) folks, and on THEIR side, I will say that this is how we are ALL supposed to feel due to our system of innocent until proven guilty. In the interest of disclosure, I am a member of this group.

There is the BDIWTEDMSBII (Brad Did It, Wait, The Evidence Doesn't Make Sense, Brad Is Innocent)

Then there is the NSIHDIBTTWH (Not Sure If He Did It, But The Trial Was Hokey), and they present their own compelling beliefs.

What appears to be missing is the ITHIBATTITHG (I Think He's Innocent, But After The Trial, I Think He's Guilty). There does not seem to be a group that went in thinking he was innocent, but after being shown the evidence, became convinced he was guilty. And the abscence of those people in a forum as large as this, makes me wonder if anyone like that was present on the jury.

:twocents:

I am actually sort of in the group that you are referring to. I thought there was a solid chance that he was innocent but it was more like 50/50. After the trial I lean hard towards guilt but gotta wait and see what the defense team does for an appeal.

Many things about this case have set me off and they still do. Some of the inside information given early on in the case that turned out not to be true. I pretty much guessed it wasn't true either only to get a timeout for expressing my opinion. Also, much has been said about Brad being an abuser. He was but so was his wife. I still don't think Brad was the controlling freak that many made him to be. She could not control her spending. Neither could he actually. She belittled him to her friends any chance she got.

I think they are both guilty of how destructive there relationship became. They pushed each others limits and while Brad withdrew, Nancy played the sympathy card with her friends. Ultimately, Brad snapped and he is going to pokey.
 
Yikes, this thread looks like a big old BII festival.

Nobody knew BC. Nobody hand a handle on what sort of man he is, he seemed to be devoid of the sort of personality characteristics that usually distinguish a person. IMO, that's what's drawn so many supporters to him. He's like a blank slate, a movie screen upon which all sorts of things can be projected. Want to see an innocent martyr? There's your blank slate. Want to see a victim of injustice? There's your blank slate.

Want to see a murderer? Look at the circumstantial evidence and use common sense. Wonder where the shoes are, and wonder why NC slept with the bedroom door locked. Imagine the blank slate stalking his previous girlfriend. The blankness takes on a far more sinister quality, in light of how he has dealt with women who want to leave him.

Excellent observation, B-Cap.

It's hard to dislike neutral -- no color, no sound, no movement, no touchy-feely or even icky-ness, nothingness, lack of really anything. A blank slate to, as you say, paint whatever one would like.
 
[B said:
momto3kid[/b]s;6452285]Being a BDI, I won’t deny the defense put up a good fight, at times placed doubt with me. I feel the pros/LE dropped the ball at times.

I so agree with your comments, momto. Very nice compilation!

One big request, please:

< snipped -- only to save space >

4-Dr Hilkey a forensic psychologist states BC is narcissistic and arrogant with anxiety and anger issues. IMO, BC is a classic case.

< snipped -- only to save space >

BBM - Where can I find Hilkey's statement that includes this evaluation? I cannot find it, but I am obviously not looking in the right place, or I am not looking for the right media . I would like to review his comments.

Many thanks, momto3!
icon12.gif
 
Can't believe I forgot one of the most famous cases that's been followed/argued for 33+ years. Jeffrey MacDonald (NC). Convicted in 1979 for killing his pregnant wife and 2 young daughters in 1970 and has been serving a life sentence. Was the subject of a famous book by Joe McGinnis and that book was made into a TV Movie starring Gary Cole.

Yep, he's had people arguing his innocence ever since, to no avail. And his case was long before there was DNA testing available. In that case there was a lot of blood evidence. Each of the victims and MacDonald had different blood types, so investigators were able to determine who was where in the apt based on blood type. MacDonald's story didn't match the blood evidence.
:innocent:

This occurred not far from where I grew up, and I followed it closely. He was convicted of 2 counts of 2ndDM, and one count of 1stDm. His sentence was 3 consecutive life sentences which he is now serving. Another bad dude...
icon8.gif
 
I am still 100% convinced the jury made the right decision.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
175
Guests online
899
Total visitors
1,074

Forum statistics

Threads
589,938
Messages
17,927,945
Members
228,007
Latest member
BeachyTee
Back
Top