Zach Adams on trial -kidnapping/murder Holly Bobo 9/20-22, 2017 GUILTY

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
lonetraveler said:
Don't forget Shayne's attempt to get immunity deal. To get immunity deal you have to have been involved or you would have nothing to deal with. IMO You would also not kill yourself after immunity deal fell apart unless you really, really didn't want to sit in prison waiting for death sentence to be carried out.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, not true. SA's immunity deal was an attempt to get immunity for unrelated drug charges, and in it he never admitted any involvement in kidnapping, rape, or murder of HB whatsoever - and in fact his ability to get any immunity was totally tied to a complete NON involvement except after she was already dead (ie, probably disposal of her body). He never ever said he had anything to do with these charged crimes, and the state never charged him in any way.
 
cfreyja23 said:
This is why I always say not to over prep trial presentations. Some preparation is obviously required, but extemporaneous speaking will always allow you to better connect emotionally with the judge or jury. It's just better, IMO.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I do this for every witness and every argument. I'll sketch an outline of the broad issues, but never have a script. The ability to be flexible is the name of the game.
 
2Hope4 said:
This case is very unusual! There's not usually 5 people given immunity!!
Click to expand...

All four didn't windup testifying did they? I could have missed one. I don't think if SA had lived he would have been given immunity. The state said he lied about his true involvement. He is just listed as one because that was the way it was before he committed suicide. However I have seen cases where more than one person was given use immunity to testify. JA didn't have state immunity either and only had federal immunity. I think some who were given immunity was because the murder weapon was illegally obtained by felons or they admitted to doing illegal drugs.

<modsnip>
 
2Hope4 said:
This case is very unusual! There's not usually 5 people given immunity!!
Click to expand...
Was DA suppose to testify? What does his immunity entail? Autry only gets immunity from his words being used against him.... he's also hoping to get the DP off the table but nothing in writing that I know of.

It seems obvious that a felon won't testify to a gun being sold to him without immunity. That's a guaranteed 10 year sentence.
 
popsicle said:
Whenever you have a crime committed by more than one person, it is not at all unusual for one to take a deal for testimony. Why did Autry? As simple as beating ZA to the deal, otherwise he would be facing the DP. ZA was running his mouth to everyone just about.
Click to expand...

Autry is still facing the death penalty. He's hoping it will be taken off the table because he testified. He really has nothing to lose by making this deal if he is guilty.
 
SteveS said:
Respectfully, not true. SA's immunity deal was an attempt to get immunity for unrelated drug charges, and in it he never admitted any involvement in kidnapping, rape, or murder of HB whatsoever - and in fact his ability to get any immunity was totally tied to a complete NON involvement except after she was already dead (ie, probably disposal of her body). He never ever said he had anything to do with these charged crimes, and the state never charged him in any way.
Click to expand...
Well he lied to LE and they were rescinding the deal.
 
Dylan doesnt have immunity to my knowledge, I know 2 of them testified there are 2 others who have immunity but havent testified - Michael and another guy
 
Emi said:
Dylan doesnt have immunity to my knowledge, I know 2 of them testified there are 2 others who have immunity but havent testified - Michael and another guy
Click to expand...

Thanks Emi. The last I heard Dylan was going to plead the 5th if called and as of now, he doesn't have a plea deal. I think he knew his brother meant what he said and felt if he testified against him he would have someone in prison or the jail kill him. Someone already doing life with nothing to lose. I think Dylan is deathly afraid of his brother.
 
I predict verdict on Friday afternoon or Saturday.

If they all agree on the primary charges, then they don't have to go through all the lesser-includeds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
I have never seen a weaker case than this put on by the state and I am shocked this even made it to trial. NOT GUILTY would be my verdict if I was a juror. The only way I see guilty coming in is if all 12 jurors are basing their judgement on pure emotion with no logic or reasoning behind it. I watched every single second of this trial, took notes, and even transcribed at times. Rewatched various testimonies. There are a ton of holes and contradictions. The timelines don't match up or correlate in driving times that the state is trying to allege. They didn't outline this for they jury because it wouldn't work. Just as their cell data was vanilla in it's presentation, as it doesn't work. Their theory continued to evolve through the trial. I have much to share in my observations but I have literally let my house go to wreck to watch the trial.


I will comment more later with
 
popsicle said:
Well he lied to LE and they were rescinding the deal.
Click to expand...

Were they? They claimed they would charge him, and claimed they would void his immunity deal, but never did either. Actions speak louder than words. At the time it felt like they were trying to pressure him with idle threats, and had no REAL intent of either, but who can say.
 
Walker007 said:
I have never seen a weaker case than this put on by the state and I am shocked this even made it to trial. NOT GUILTY would be my verdict if I was a juror. The only way I see guilty coming in is if all 12 jurors are basing their judgement on pure emotion with no logic or reasoning behind it. I watched every single second of this trial, took notes, and even transcribed at times. Rewatched various testimonies. There are a ton of holes and contradictions. The timelines don't match up or correlate in driving times that the state is trying to allege. They didn't outline this for they jury because it wouldn't work. Just as their cell data was vanilla in it's presentation, as it doesn't work. Their theory continued to evolve through the trial. I have much to share in my observations but I have literally let my house go to wreck to watch the trial.


I will comment more later with
Click to expand...

So I think I have narrowed my question down to anyone who is saying "not guilty".

If Zach Adams is facing the death penalty and not guilty, then why isn't he testifying?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
SteveS said:
Respectfully, not true. SA's immunity deal was an attempt to get immunity for unrelated drug charges, and in it he never admitted any involvement in kidnapping, rape, or murder of HB whatsoever - and in fact his ability to get any immunity was totally tied to a complete NON involvement except after she was already dead (ie, probably disposal of her body). He never ever said he had anything to do with these charged crimes, and the state never charged him in any way.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for pointing my error out so quickly. I stand corrected.
 
[video=twitter;911003824944492544]https://twitter.com/NC5_ChrisConte/status/911003824944492544[/video]

Chris Conte&#8207;*@NC5_ChrisConte 1m
1 minute ago

Jurors dismissed for the night. Judge telling them not to make any decisions on case tonight. Back tomorrow at 8:30am
#hollybobo
 
[video=twitter;911003567418494976]https://twitter.com/FOX13Memphis/status/911003567418494976[/video]

FOX13 Memphis&#8207;
Verified account
*@FOX13Memphis 4m
4 minutes ago

Jury recessing for the evening. No verdict yet. Deliberations will resume at 8:30 a.m. tomorrow morning. #HollyBobo
 
[video=twitter;911003855789359105]https://twitter.com/WBBJ7News/status/911003855789359105[/video]

[video=twitter;911003824944492544]https://twitter.com/NC5_ChrisConte/status/911003824944492544[/video]

[video=twitter;911003905034665984]https://twitter.com/CCLawNewz/status/911003905034665984[/video]
 
popsicle said:
Well he lied to LE and they were rescinding the deal.
Click to expand...

And the key part of his testimony, in my opinion, is that he pointed the finger of blame at the other 3.

So that is another person, to add to the long list, that claims Zach is a guilty party here. Why would Shayne, Dylan and Justin all say these things about Zach, if none of them were involved?
 
[video=twitter;911005305055727619]https://twitter.com/WBBJ7News/status/911005305055727619[/video]
 
Ellej said:
If Zach Adams is facing the death penalty and not guilty, then why isn't he testifying?
Click to expand...

I'm not in favor of "not guilty" but there are solid explanations for this one:
1 Some people make good witnesses, and some don't. Period. And the difference isn't necessarily honesty or innocence, vs the opposite. So if he wouldn't make a good witness, do we force him on the stand and then hang him because we take a glance at how uncomfortable he looked, for example? It can happen. So the defense is wise to be cautious.
2 He doesn't have to testify and prove anything, and a defendant not testifying is the norm rather than something unusual. The idea that "he must be guilty if he didn't testify" is the same sort of nonsense (and danger to justice) as the idea that "they wouldn't have him on trial if he wasn't guilty."
3 If he did testify, he would have been confronted by his prior statements, and have to account for them, and even if he could show that those supposed "confessions" were all lies by him or by the witnesses who spoke, it probably would have made the jury mad to hear him speak of claiming to have said such things. (And the defense pointed out that there were about 20 other people in the area also claiming to have done things to HB and that "do you like I did HB" was used as a threat by others too.)
4 In her closing statement, the def atty spoke for him and explained for him. They had that workaround, without the downside, and took it.
 
Ellej said:
So I think I have narrowed my question down to anyone who is saying "not guilty".

If Zach Adams is facing the death penalty and not guilty, then why isn't he testifying?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Because he doesn’t have to prove he didn’t do it... the prosecution must prove he did... I hope that helps


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 212 more.
Total: 3,757 (members: 213, guests: 3,544)

Online statistics

Members online
213
Guests online
3,544
Total visitors
3,757
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,256
Messages
17,966,314
Members
228,734
Latest member
TexasCuriousMynd
Back
Top