Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wait how do people know what SA's testimony was going to be? Was he telling people what he was going to say before he died? Surely that's conjecture.
The 'they' that Dinsmore testified to in regards to trying to snatch his daughter was the Piercy (sp?) brothers. The defense was able to clarify that later in his testimony. (Day 5 part 2 at the 39:20 mark of his testimony)
[video=youtube;mYbTmGn2fig]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYbTmGn2fig[/video]
SteveS said:It's unclear if the def atty even has a clue how big an issue this could be. The state has built a case about HB being stalked and grabbed, while (unless I have misread it completely, because I didn't yet get to watch this live) the story of their star witness (whose story must be true, to have a case) is saying she was only collateral to some "meth-making class" that Clint wanted to enroll in. This part of the story casts doubt on everything, but the state is more or less acting like it's a lie, yet they can't have it both ways when it comes to JA's credibility.
Plumeria5 said:Question: Who do you think abducted Holly in the carport?
A. SA
B. ZA
C. Someone else
Katydid said:I think SA could have? And Zach was in the truck? Or vice versa...?
Plumeria5 said:I think ZA called the shots and SA was the follower. SA abducted HB in the carport at ZA's commands so that if anything went awry ZA could just drive off leaving SA to be the fall guy.
jggordo said:snipped....
I believe much of Jason's testimony. Allowances made for leaving things out that reflect badly for him. He has seen the discovery, he knows what is there. When challenged by the defense he went along with most of it and she let him. She testified for him really and just allowed him to agree.
I think adults who are long past their teenage years, like decades past, have no idea the pervasiveness of drugs and are shocked when reality hits. Suddenly small town memories of decades gone by are upended. Some areas are known to have massive drug problems, even the small town I grew up in in the northeast has gone that way, and I haven't lived there since I was 18.
Evil cannot be explained only by looking at drugs. And I daresay, evil may not be easily explainable at all. So all one can do is go by actions taken. And the bottomline is 3 men, possibly more, were part of a crime involving kidnapping, rape, murder, and obstruction. The connection between the person on trial and the victim has been established through technology, witness statements, even statements allegedly made by the defendant himself.
To believe this defendant is not guilty means you have to ignore every bit of evidence and testimony that has come in so far, means you have to believe someone else was in possession of the defendant's cell phone during the day of the kidnapping, and you'd have to believe for some reason the defendant decided to talk about his own involvement to friends and then believe he was just making it up.
She said she doesn't remember him going to bed, but she remembers him waking her up around 6-7:30 a.m. on the day Holly Bobo disappeared.
She said she saw Zach again that afternoon when he came to her work. She said they got into an argument again. She said she accused Zach of cheating on her. She said she thought he was cheating because he had his brother's (Dylan's) phone.
I guess I'm missing some point, but how does ZA using DA's phone to call or text her make Rebecca think ZA is cheating on her? Or is she trying to help ZA by throwing in doubt that he was with his phone that morning making the jury possibly think the pings aren't that important? I am also inclined to think that JA did the same with throwing in about ZA going to teach CB to make meth - hoping to make the jury think this was not premeditated
<modsnip>
The 'they' that Dinsmore testified to in regards to trying to snatch his daughter was the Piercy (sp?) brothers. The defense was able to clarify that later in his testimony. (Day 5 part 2 at the 39:20 mark of his testimony)
[video=youtube;mYbTmGn2fig]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYbTmGn2fig[/video]
Now that we know the DNA on the panties that were found did not match Bobo's....oh, wait, or do we??
That "throw the panties out" came in Friday's testimony from TBI Agent Booth.
So that is troubling .....the previous testimony below given on Day 2:
Same linked article above by Harmony2:
http://m.wmcactionnews5.com/story/36343692/bobo-trial-day-2-defense-prepares-cross-examination
Quote from the article by TBI agent Lawrence James - see the 2nd paragraph below:
"Ultimately, James said there were 50-60 drops of blood in the garage. He grouped these into five areas and observed them.
From there, he matched the blood against the underwear and got a partial match for Holly Bobo.
He said the DNA match was partial due to the interference of dirt, but he emphasized that it was still a reliable match.
James ran the DNA three times; one test had his DNA in it (meaning the sample was compromised in the lab), which he said has happened to him just twice in his 18 years of work."
*********
What on earth? So somehow he got a DNA match there but Friday, Day 5 of Trial, that was contradicted entirely by that other TBI agent Booth who the defense cross-examined and this came out:
I will make it easy for you: check this testimony out....actually the link isn't working for replay, but it is Fox 13. Won't pop up on the web but all the testimony re-play does pop up on the app.
FOX13 video - Day 5, Part 2, Minute 36 is where this few minute testimony is given where he holds up the pink panties.
Booth basically says the DNA on the panties are a combination of a couple people.
Curious ---this came out as a cross examine of DEFENSE. So I am curious if prosecution will try to get to the bottom of this with another witness dispute or an actual lab tester or something. They may decide not to touch it and they have other strong points to focus on.
This contradiction is interesting none the less. Both agents were with TBI declaring the exact opposite of one another on the stand.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't recall hearing testimony where SA has implicated himself as a murderer. I don't recall SA killed that body in the swamp. I thought he said he had seen a floating corpse upon his arrival to said swamp. Then SA testified he attempted to help dispose of HB but once he saw movement (foot move) and heard a gasp ZA then shot HBDylan had no prior convictions for deadly crimes. Jason however, in his testimony, implied he's a murderer. He described the bloated dead body he saw.. he made reference to 'gutting' Holly. He talked like he was real experienced. He offered to help with disposing of her body.
I don't recall hearing testimony where SA has implicated himself as a murderer. I don't recall SA killed that body in the swamp. I thought he said he had seen a floating corpse upon his arrival to said swamp. Then SA testified he attempted to help dispose of HB but once he saw movement (foot move) and heard a gasp ZA then shot HB
The testimony about the underwear has me stumped. Hollys mother identified them as belonging to Holly yet they didn't have Hollys DNA but someone else's. Could it be that ZA kept them as a souvenir then passed them on to another girlfriend?
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk