MISTRIAL - Sidney Moorer on trial for the kidnapping of Heather Elvis #4

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
The one day I can't watch live trial/verdict footage .. and I'm off work ... go figure... been getting tweets to update and have to say I'm disappointed .. but if it's true only two were not on the same page, I think a new trial could be a benefit ..
 
I'm in awe of the WS members dedication, desire for justice and knowledge. I was watching the live-streaming but found y'all had more insight, experience and the best "color analysts". I do believe that LE and prosecutors could learn a wealth of knowledge by consulting with y'all. Please send our link to the prosecutors.
 
jillycat said:
Maybe because her motive was so much more evident. If you recall, it was even stated at trial that SM had never spoken to her unkindly or threatened her in any way, and he 'cared" for her. TM's hatred of Heather is well-documented, and often by TM herself.
Click to expand...



BBM - I do not think the hatred of Heather by TM would be enough to convict her. It certainly goes to motive, but for the charge of kidnapping, I find it hard to believe there would have been a unanimous verdict. I don't know how the leap could be made from her hatred of Heather to the opportunity to commit the act. Other than SM saying she was in the truck just the other day, how would they get from point a to z w/o the payphone call? I absolutely think the right thing was done to try SM first.
 
Dylgem22 said:
The one day I can't watch live trial/verdict footage .. and I'm off work ... go figure... been getting tweets to update and have to say I'm disappointed .. but if it's true only two were not on the same page, I think a new trial could be a benefit ..
Click to expand...

Perhaps it is blessing in disguise for the Elvis family and for Heather. With the way this trial went and the blatant bias we saw (IMO), I have no question in my mind that if a guilty verdict were rendered SM would have received a light sentence. Maybe with a new judge AND a guilty verdict there is a higher probability of him receiving the max sentence. Heather got life, the least he can get is 30; though still grossly unfair, I'd take it.
 
Such a shame... only two people screw everything up! :gaah:

I guess we will have a different thread for the Contempt charges on the gag-order on Sept. 6th! :wave: see you then!
 
LBDunes said:
[/B]

BBM - I do not think the hatred of Heather by TM would be enough to convict her. It certainly goes to motive, but for the charge of kidnapping, I find it hard to believe there would have been a unanimous verdict. I don't know how the leap could be made from her hatred of Heather to the opportunity to commit the act. Other than SM saying she was in the truck just the other day, how would they get from point a to z w/o the payphone call? I absolutely think the right thing was done to try SM first.
Click to expand...

The question was why did a lawyer/legal analyst say she should have been tried first. I'm saying maybe (he had that opinion) because her motive is more obvious given her behavior over a period of time. I would never argue that anyone can or should be convicted because they hated the victim.
 
The weather is obviously just as mad about this as we are because it just started raging outside!
 
Okay, that's all of the obsession I can allow myself for today. I'll record the 6:00 news on WMBF, since they say they're going to break down the jury, but that's all I have in me for the rest of the day. Y'all have been great, as usual. I'll check in tomorrow.
 
LanieCoz said:
Perhaps it is blessing in disguise for the Elvis family and for Heather. With the way this trial went and the blatant bias we saw (IMO), I have no question in my mind that if a guilty verdict were rendered SM would have received a light sentence. Maybe with a new judge AND a guilty verdict there is a higher probability of him receiving the max sentence. Heather got life, the least he can get is 30; though still grossly unfair, I'd take it.
Click to expand...

As long as he's convicted and put away before he gets a chance to walk his daughter down the aisle, justice will be served. Mr. Elvis will never be able to walk Heather down the aisle, so Sidney Moorer shouldn't be able to either.
 
jillycat said:
The question was why did a lawyer/legal analyst say she should have been tried first. I'm saying maybe (he had that opinion) because her motive is more obvious given her behavior over a period of time. I would never argue that anyone can or should be convicted because they hated the victim.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking the opposite. Maybe he knows there's not enough evidence to find her guilty, and the prosecution could point to the fact that she was already found not guilty, so she could not possibly be the one driving that truck.
 
ZooSleuth said:
Agreed. Watching this trial confirmed to me what others from the area have been saying on here, the justice system down there is filled with corruption and incompetence.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. Look at what has been going on with HCPD too. SMH

I truly do dislike this place. Even more so now.
 
TTF14 said:
I've vacationed in MB three times in my life, and I'm pretty confident I'll never go back since I became aware of Heather Elvis and have read many stories like yours since then.
Click to expand...

MB isn't a bad place to visit, I live approximately 4 hrs away and we enjoy it. The problem we incurred is the younger generation and it's always full of people on the beach. Lived on the beaches growing up(with family).

I suppose every town has its share of crimes, times have changed so much.

Thoughts and prayers go out to the Heather Elvis family.
 
jillycat said:
The question was why did a lawyer/legal analyst say she should have been tried first. I'm saying maybe (he had that opinion) because her motive is more obvious given her behavior over a period of time. I would never argue that anyone can or should be convicted because they hated the victim.
Click to expand...


BBM - Exactly! I would have to see their reasoning, but it can't be just her well known hatred of the girl.
 
Someone please tell me that the judge did not do a "high five" with SM after the hung jury was declared.
 
TTF14 said:
I'm thinking the opposite. Maybe he knows there's not enough evidence to find her guilty, and the prosecution could point to the fact that she was already found not guilty, so she could not possibly be the one driving that truck.
Click to expand...

That's possible. I think there are/were pros and cons to trying them together, trying one before the other, etc. On one hand, TM's motive was all over the place, but she can't be tied directly to things. On the other hand, SM had no obvious axe to grind (maybe the pregnancy, maybe not, depending on how a jury views both police and Bri statements that he 'cared" for HE), but he had contact with her hours before she disappeared. No matter what, the state has to do much better next time.
 
cujenn81 said:
The weather is obviously just as mad about this as we are because it just started raging outside!
Click to expand...

Just keep in mind it could have been a not guilty verdict.Then your house may have blown off the hinges ! ;)
 
LanieCoz said:
It is times like these that I have to remind myself that God is the ultimate Judge and Jury. I feel like I must be bad luck for cases... I followed the CA trial, which undoubtedly should have rendered a guilty verdict (IMO), and well we knew how that turned out. Then this case it comes to a deadlock.

I consider myself a pretty objective person and I have tried to consider the various different scenarios and possibilities - all of which still point to SM and TM being responsible for the disappearance of HE. I truly wonder what the holdouts were for. Did they believe that SM was guilty but just didn't feel like the state proved the kidnapping to have taken place at PTL? I guess that is what frustrates me SOOO much about not only this case but society in general. They confuse reasonable doubt and without a shadow of a doubt. My husband (who had no knowledge of this case prior to this week) believes that he is guilty of whatever ultimately happened to HE; HOWEVER, says that he does not feel the state proved it either. The way he explained his rationale was that they no greater proved she was kidnapped as they might have proved he could have paid her off to disappear from the area. Of course, that is poppycock to me. Point being, some people think this way. Darn those people, husband included - LOL! He won't have a happy wife tonight, I'm afraid.

I had asked my husband last night, considering he would vote NG, if he were the only one or two holding out with NG vote, would he switch since he truly feels SM is guilty of whatever ultimately happened to HE, his response was that he wasn't sure but possibly. Makes you want to bang your head against the wall, doesn't it?

I am looking forward to a retrial, hoping and praying they go forward with one. I think this case was pretty much doomed with bias to begin with considering the Judge knew the defendant and the history there, in addition to KT's friend. The only silver lining is that it wasn't a NG verdict.

Can't wait for happy hour.
Click to expand...


Just wanted to add to thank him as his analogy is one of the better ones I have heard as to why someone could consider a NG verdict.
Its good to hear how different people view the evidence.

If I was on the jury with him, then I would have to point out that there was no evidence that HE took a flight anywhere else and since her car was found there it points to her not making it through the night. The preponderance of other evidence about SM and TM points to he wanted to "fix it" once and for all. With TM showing physical violence in the past to HE which was described as a black eye and broken nose somewhere and TM slapping SM about HE subject it seems obvious to me that HE did not survive the night. SM either did it himself to keep from getting killed himself by TM or TM was right there along with him. I could even see TM hiding in that truck and jumping out and strangling HE in a fit of rage.

But I am glad to hear others views because it is hard sometimes to see how two people on a jury saw it the other way.

I totally agree with you and we have talked in other cases about the need for better jury instructions before they go back to deliberate.
These are the public and the bottom line is it is a little confusing when it comes to the juror rules of what is considered reasonable doubt and what isn't.

They just read to the jury a few quick instructions and expect the laymen public to be able to understand and I think we can do much better right before deliberations. They should have an hour long class or more before they go back to deliberate.

I really do think a lot of people get hung up on thinking if there is even the slightest chance there could be another possibility of something else happening then we have to give that defendant the benefit of the doubt that he didn't do it. Which is totally not the case IMO.

Common sense and preponderance of evidence has to come into play and our jury instructions need to be more clear for folks.
What did all the evidence just tell us. Are we going to say but a UFO could have landed and took her that night too so we must say NG.
Of course not. We are going to say what did the evidence tell us is guaranteed to have happened.
And that is that they did something to make her disappear that night.

All JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 122 more.
Total: 3,979 (members: 123, guests: 3,856)

Online statistics

Members online
123
Guests online
3,856
Total visitors
3,979
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,498
Messages
17,969,903
Members
228,788
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top