NOTGUILTY FL - Collin Griffith, 17, stabs mother to death 1 year after fatally shooting father - Sep. 11, 2024

Obviously, IANAL, but I can't wrap my head around the court's decision to bar any mention (to the jury) of the defendant's murder of his father. I wonder if jurors will feel hoodwinked by not having been apprised of this, given that it happened relatively shortly before the defendant murdered his mother, and given that it might have been seen as the start of a pattern of conduct (patricide/matricide) that the murder of the mother continued.
 
Obviously, IANAL, but I can't wrap my head around the court's decision to bar any mention (to the jury) of the defendant's murder of his father. I wonder if jurors will feel hoodwinked by not having been apprised of this, given that it happened relatively shortly before the defendant murdered his mother, and given that it might have been seen as the start of a pattern of conduct (patricide/matricide) that the murder of the mother continued.
I hear you.

But the argument is that it's soooooooo prejudicial that it will color the verdict and that opens the door to the same argument for appeal. This way it's addressed prior to trial, in order to avoid the issue being instant grounds for appeal.

But honestly, he's killed both of his parents.

Maybe the State could have waited, charging him with both at once.

This was a pretty swift trial.

Hopefully the verdict will be swift. And he'll be found guilty of this murder and justice will follow, on the other.

JMO
 
I hear you.

But the argument is that it's soooooooo prejudicial that it will color the verdict and that opens the door to the same argument for appeal. This way it's addressed prior to trial, in order to avoid the issue being instant grounds for appeal.

But honestly, he's killed both of his parents.

Maybe the State could have waited, charging him with both at once.

This was a pretty swift trial.

Hopefully the verdict will be swift. And he'll be found guilty of this murder and justice will follow, on the other.

JMO
"Maybe the State could have waited, charging him with both at once." He killed his father in Oklahoma so Florida cannot try him for that murder.
 
If I was the grandmother and they find him NG, I'd be very worried.
If they let him walk, he will kill someone else. I can't imagine having that on my conscience, it's very unfair that the jury don't have all the facts.
I could be wrong about this, but my gut feeling about grandma's testimony, where she completely surprised the prosecution by supporting the defendant and attacking the victim----I think she was worried that he was going to be found Not Guilty or be given short sentence, and she was afraid to testify against her grandson because she is afraid of him.

She may think that he won't be angry with her if she publicly agrees with him that the victim brought it on herself. :confused:
 
I really hope the jury keeps in mind that he has killed before. They must be so curious/confused about that. Why is he not in jail? They must be wondering who and how, and why was he out and free?
Because he's young, perhaps the jury will wonder if he killed someone when he was too young to be tried. I do believe they're free to consider the facts as they know them -- even if they don't wonder or speculate, it's there. How many people do ANY of us know who've had two murdery situations in their lives? That's a lot of self-defensing, if you believe that argument.

Or.... is more reasonable that you have an unregulated young person with a homicidal temper, too often tripped?

I predict a verdict within two hours. Guilty on kidnapping. Guilty on murder, either murder 1 or murder 2.

JMO
 
Because he's young, perhaps the jury will wonder if he killed someone when he was too young to be tried. I do believe they're free to consider the facts as they know them -- even if they don't wonder or speculate, it's there. How many people do ANY of us know who've had two murdery situations in their lives? That's a lot of self-defensing, if you believe that argument.

Or.... is more reasonable that you have an unregulated young person with a homicidal temper, too often tripped?

I predict a verdict within two hours. Guilty on kidnapping. Guilty on murder, either murder 1 or murder 2.

JMO
Th self defense argument baffles me because they didn't really say he was being physically attacked by his mom, did they?

I have to listen to the closing arguments still, I haven't had a chance yet.
 
Th self defense argument baffles me because they didn't really say he was being physically attacked by his mom, did they?

I have to listen to the closing arguments still, I haven't had a chance yet.
Oh, yes, they did.

Said it was reasonable for the jury to think she had the knife, she attacked him. Even went so far as to liken it to 'suicide by cop', suggesting she might have been provoking him purposefully so that he would kill her. Suicide by son.

I know defense attorneys have a job to do.... but some things are really hard to listen to.

JMO
 
Oh, yes, they did.

Said it was reasonable for the jury to think she had the knife, she attacked him. Even went so far as to liken it to 'suicide by cop', suggesting she might have been provoking him purposefully so that he would kill her. Suicide by son.

I know defense attorneys have a job to do.... but some things are really hard to listen to.

JMO

That's so twisted :mad:
 
I could be wrong about this, but my gut feeling about grandma's testimony, where she completely surprised the prosecution by supporting the defendant and attacking the victim----I think she was worried that he was going to be found Not Guilty or be given short sentence, and she was afraid to testify against her grandson because she is afraid of him.

She may think that he won't be angry with her if she publicly agrees with him that the victim brought it on herself. :confused:

The exact same thought crossed my mind too. Let's hope we don't have to find out if she's as wrong about that as I think she is!.
 
What was the jury allowed to know about him having killed previously?
IIUC that he killed someone previously (can't say his dad, can't say a relative and can't say that it was at home because the jury might draw an inference, Court is trying to prevent inference) and that he was never charged for it.

JMO
 
Jury has a request.

They want a transcript of the testimony of neighbors, SB and NJ.

The judge is seeking input from the attorneys because there is no transcript (yet).

Question whether to say no outright (because a transcript isn't available), rely on your collective memories. Or they can ask to have a specific portion read back.

Defense ways him to tell the jury that no transcripts are available. Period.

State wants the judge to leave them the option to ask for a specific read back.

Judge will tell them that there are no transcripts available, they should rely on their collective memory. If they cannot, tt's possible for a read back may be granted, to a specific portion.
 
Jury has a request.

They want a transcript of the testimony of neighbors, SB and NJ.

The judge is seeking input from the attorneys because there is no transcript (yet).

Question whether to say no outright (because a transcript isn't available), rely on your collective memories. Or they can ask to have a specific portion read back.

Defense ways him to tell the jury that no transcripts are available. Period.

State wants the judge to leave them the option to ask for a specific read back.

Judge will tell them that there are no transcripts available, they should rely on their collective memory. If they cannot, tt's possible for a read back may be granted, to a specific portion.
OOOH, what did those neighbours testify to? Was it the lady who saw him pull his mom back into the house?
 

DNASolves

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
91
Guests online
1,705
Total visitors
1,796

Forum statistics

Threads
616,620
Messages
18,353,722
Members
237,163
Latest member
SMWarner8159
Back
Top