kittythehare
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2016
- Messages
- 17,643
- Reaction score
- 100,999
[FONT="]We are taking a lunch break until 2:30. When we return, jury picks foreman and goes into deliberation[/FONT]
[video=twitter;894954508622721024]https://twitter.com/alexrosenews/status/894954508622721024[/video]
[FONT="]We are taking a lunch break until 2:30. When we return, jury picks foreman and goes into deliberation[/FONT]
All I could think was about the crack across his nose likely made when he was down, and that they didn't strike him in the teeth when he was down.So where are the injuries on MM if she was the one blocking the injuries to JC's teeth or chin. Or is the defence trying to insinuate that TM is a master batsman, not a mark on MM.
what bothers me most is what appears to be the lack of info from the blood spatter expert.
A definite time of death could have been obtained from examination of wound edges.
Sequence of blows could also have been obtained.
Fatal blow could have been ascertained.. the blow causing the injury that ensures life cannot be sustained..
Now, its possible this information is in statement from blood spatter expert given to jury, but I feel state has been remiss here.. they should IMO have obtained the services of several different forensic experts, each a specialist in above areas.
Its a major flaw in the investigation if they did not.
There are far more tests that can be conducted on a body apart from temperature measurement that will pinpoint times.
ABOUT TIME this lady had a light shone on her!Yes, yes, yes!!!
The defense could have subpoened the video and entered it into evidence. It is curious to me that neither side chose to use the video. Anyway, I do not think the jurors will take this bait, they will know that the defense had access to all the prosecution evidence, as required by law, and nothing has been withheld from them.Just wondering about this comment from the defence lawyers. They cite a video that was taken of MM a few hours after the murder and the fact that the prosecution did not show it. "That alone would have been a show stopper". If the defence thought this video was a show stopper, why did they not present it? Why highlight something as evidence for their case that the prosecution did not do when they could have done it themselves? Surely the defence would have had access to this video.
http://www.journalnow.com/news/crim...al&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share
kittythehare---are you as nervous as me?
Even when MEs narrow down a TOD it is never to the exact minute and is always a guesstimate time interval with time leeways. So I really think it isn't that important. The first responders are very good in knowing when a body is way too cool for someone to have just died. I think their testimony will be enough for the jury to know the defendants stage the crime scene before calling 911.