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

[maskedwoman]

Well, there is a pretty fine line then if you say, on one hand, you don't believe the defendant is innocent, but on the other, don't believe the state made it's case. If you believe the suspect is 'not innocent', there must be reasons for believing so.

If I believe a defendant is 'not innocent' of an abduction, gang rape that ends in murder, I am voting GUILTY. I am not wanting someone dangerous walking free and continuing their rampage.


I just cannot accept that it is 'irrelevant' that a juror believes a defendant did in fact commit the violent crime.

I agree. When we consider these issues, we also have to remember that juries don't (or aren't supposed to) know all the things we know from following the case from the beginning. They only know what was presented in the courtroom. So, if a juror thinks the parties are "not innocent", then he or she must have come to that conclusion based on the evidence presented. I don't really see how you can say the evidence convinced you the defendant was not innocent but that you cannot vote guilty.

Having been on murder juries twice, and sat through a number of jury selection proceedings, I have come to realize that some people couldn't find someone guilty no matter what. They simply don't want to the responsibility. But, instead of admitting that to themselves or others, they cop out and say things like "well I just didn't think the state proved their case well enough". A number of years ago, I saw one woman hang three different juries by saying the same thing. The other members of the jury pool finally revolted and refused to serve on another jury with her. Until then, this woman was the lone holdout on three felony trials.

 

[zencompass]

Here's what I put together - have questions behind some of the times, so if anyone can add to it - it would be very much appreciated! TIA!

April 13, 2011
In case others want to see all in chronological order.

4:54a - 8:18a – Zach – no activity (from 8:17a to 8:25a Holly's phone is moving near Cox Rd @ 641/I40)

6:50a - Jason-- near Camden (GF house) text

6:51a - 8:19a – Jason -- no pings

7:00a - Karen Bobo leaves for work/Holly was sitting at dining room table, also texting back and forth with classmate Hannah
7:30a -- Holly speaks to BF, Drew re hunting on grandmother's property
7:30a - 7:40a - Holly -- home area
7:40a - Neighbor hears a scream (& hears fighting for 45 seconds (per Def "cell" expert)
7:42a - Holly -- last outgoing call (Me: wondering "who" she dialed-maybe not-phone in back pocket, she gets knocked to the ground in carport maybe and butt dials; someone tesified her phone in back pocket)
7:45a - Neighbor's mother calls Karen
7:50a - Clint is awakened by dogs barking/Karen calls Clint
7:53a - 8:09a - Holly's phone connect to towers close to home
7:55a - Karen calls 911 from work

8:00a - Karen calls Clint to call 911 after he tells her what he saw
8:00a - Holly's phone is moving
8:11a - Holly's phone from house and hits Tower 1 then moved (per Def "cell" expert)
8:16a - Holly's phone at Shiloh Rd Tower
8:17a - Holly's phone going north I40 (Shiloh Rd Tower)
8:17a - 8:26a – Holly -- ping off 2 different towers / stays there for 25 minutes (per Def "cell" expert)
8:17a - 8:55a - rape occurred between 8:17am and 8:55am (if Autry is to be believed that Holly was already in back of Zach's truck, wrapped at 8:55a )
8:18a - Zach's phone on
8:19a – Zach's phone at Cox Rd @ 641/I40- incoming text From JA
8:19a - 8:53a - Zach's phone utilizing same tower close to his home
8:28a -- Defense witness (Dicas) says ZA phone pings at home (several miles from where Holly's pings)
8:30a – Zach -- outgoing text to JA
8:30a - 8:52a Zach and JA-- texting back & forth
8:53a - 8:55a – Zach - phone call from JA-call went to voice mail--Zach called JA back –Zach’s phone near Yellow Springs & Adams house (Holly's pinged twice just after 9 near where Adams' phone pings - by Yellow Springs near Cox Rd)
8:55a – Jason phone - Autry, Adams & Holly's all shown in same area (same tower) - (at Shayne's where Jason sees Holly's body wrapped in back of Zach's truck)

~8:19a - 9:12a -- Zach's phone close to home-in same general area of where Holly's phone pings)
8:57a - 9:00a -- Holly's phone pings Yellow Springs area (2nd ping)
9:02a - 9:06a – Holly's phone - East of Shiloh Rd @ Cox & I40/641 (3rd tower pinged) Same tower as Zach's house
9:10a – Holly - Sugar Tree near Tennessee River (Me: possibly Shayne leaves to dump her phone)
9:10a - 10:43a --Zach - texts between ZA & Shayne Austin/Zach @ Birdsong area
9:12a – Zach's phone pings Yellow Springs area (Holly's 2nd ping in same area)
9:25a – Holly - pings near home - final ping - sim & phone found in this area.
9:40a - Holly's phone stops pinging/probably dead battery
9:42a - 10:37a – Jason phone -- pings near Tenn River near Birdsong Rd exit (Zach & Jason at Birdsong with Holly's body)
9:50a – Zach - pings near Tennessee River

10:01a - 10:32a - Zach continually texting Shayne
10:35a - Zach's phone uses the other side of tower near Birdsong Rd exit
10:35a - Jason's phone uses the other side of tower near Birdsong Rd exit
10:38a - Zach's phone moving away from tower & going back home
10:39a – Jason - phone is moving away from tower at Birdsong Rd exit (again pings near Cox Rd. (leaves Tenn river area)

11:04a -- CCTV at AmFarm shows TBI SUV traveling to Parsons
11:05a -- CCTV at AmFarm shows TBI SUV traveling to Parsons
11:07a -- CCT at AmFarm shows ZA's Pickup traveling to Parsons
11a - 12p – Zach - in Parsons (video store w/GF)

~2:30p - 3:30p - All (Zach, Jason & Shayne) at Dottie's house where Dinsmore is working - (per house cleaner testimony)

9:47p -- First 911 call by Dick Adams (ZA's GrF) - ZA is causing a problem
9:49p - Second 911 call by DA - Didn't want officers to come over
9:51p - Third 911 call by DA - ZA is back & causing problem; was raising hell, wanted guns & keys to his/Dylan's truck. More frantic call - sounds exasperated (JMO)

Dear Niner,

You are a treasure.

Over the years, whichever thread or topic I find myself in, you always go the extra distance in your wonderful way of setting out pertinent information so that it is clearer and in one place.

Your detail and time consuming work along with the compassion in all of your posts lifts my heart as I know it does others'.

My great appreciation for everything you do is shared by countless kind-hearted folks on this website.

Thank you so much!

 

[maskedwoman]

Do we have a clear statement on the 'hit it'? Because I've hard that used in regards to rape, but also in regards to drugs. Of course, in the end, nothing we type here will matter, as it's all up to the jury.

When ZA said he let Shayne hit it first, I do think he meant that he let Shayne rape her first but the term is not meant specifically to rape. I see young guys post on line all the time "I'd hit that". It's crude and gross but, in those instances, they just mean they would have sex with her. Of course, young guys are often not very, um, picky, so I guess that's not exactly a ringing endorsement. Ahem.

 

[Rayemonde]

Does anyone else find it unlikely that these men were driving around with what was obviously a body in the back of their truck, then possibly dismembering and scattering body parts in different locations, whilst there was an amber alert and hundreds of people were searching by for Holly? They'd have to be pretty lucky for no one at all to spot them acting suspiciously.

Also, something bothered me about Corey Rivers' testimony. He has that Zach told him about a video that was right under the state's noses. He asked Rivers if Rivers had a YouTube account, and said he would phone Rivers once Rivers was out of jail so Rivers could see it. Rivers, being by a good Christian, went to the authorities and told them all this. Then when he was released, Zach did try to phone him but he didn't answer because he didn't have any credit on his phone. And that was the end of that. Seriously!?! The state knew that Zach had supposedly promised to show Rivers the video and they didn't do anything about it?!? They could made sure that Rivers took that call, or that Rivers phoned Zach, and could have recorded the conversation and possibly be led to the video at last. Instead, they did nothing. The story doesn't add up at all.

 

[LookingForDavid]

Does some of the problem with this case revolve around the fact that these drug-addicted criminals just
do not think nor do they act like us normal people? They have very different attitudes and values to us.

Also many people are finding it difficult to treat the four criminals (who acted in concert or as a team), as all being criminally responsible for all the crimes committed. It simply does not matter which of the four did the abduction, the rape, or the murder. If one of them did, then all four are guilty. But some of you are still discussing that.

I was very impressed with the Prosecution's dramatic delivery of their closing arguments whereas I thought the Defence just raved on and I tuned out. She seemed to be trying too hard to convince the jury of reasonable doubt. The Judge looked bored too.

IMO too many people are getting bogged down with peripheral issues and are not looking at the big picture.

I don't know how anyone could still think that Britt was guilty.

They must not have been listening. HE WAS CLEARED.

if you still believe that Britt did it, then again you have not been listening.

Exactly. Also, if by chance one of these four had any moral character he would have stopped it in the planning stages. At any point (not sure who knew they would kidnap). So if SA and ZA did the kidnapping one of them could have said no. If DA came in for the rape he could have at that point got out and got help. He did not have to participate and keep silent. And if JA just came in for the disposal (I think he may have shot her) he could have stepped in and saved her life. And one of the most convincing pieces of evidence to me was the expression from SA's mom when she read the "confession" of her son.

 

[Rayemonde]

The statements ZA made to the inmates.
-They're not really that concide with the evidence that was found. ZA told them as a threat he would put them or others 'next to her in the hole'. Well JA testimony concluded the riverside as deposel of the body and the remains of Holly were found on the ground not in a grave, right? Both will rule out that Holly was every buried.
-The area that they all live in is a gun area, right? Aren't most murders commit with a gun? When you’re dead you’re most likely buried, right? So it’s easy to say those 2 things in a threat to make you seem tough. It's really sound like just a really stupid, stupid bragging story of ZA to me.
.

Exactly. From the prosecution witnesses, we heard that ZA said he would put someone in a hole next to Holly. But we heard from another that Holly was chopped up and scattered around the country.

Zach may have just assumed a gun was used to kill Holly, as you said. Or he may have heard some rumours about Holly being shot but not have been involved himself. Or the witness, who didn't come forward until after Holly's body was found, may have made it up, or they may have misremembered Zach's exact words. For example, Zach could have said "No weapon" and they misremembered it as "No gun". Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable at the best of times.

 

[turaj]

LawNewz Network did a poll yesterday

How would you vote on the murder charge if you were on the jury.

627 votes

77% guilty
13% not guilty
10% undecided

[video=twitter;910961440470601728]https://twitter.com/LawNewzNetwork/status/910961440470601728[/video]

that is concerning an indicative of some long deliberations.

 

[maskedwoman]

Exactly. From the prosecution witnesses, we heard that ZA said he would put someone in a hole next to Holly. But we heard from another that Holly was chopped up and scattered around the country.

Zach may have just assumed a gun was used to kill Holly, as you said. Or he may have heard some rumours about Holly being shot but not have been involved himself. Or the witness, who didn't come forward until after Holly's body was found, may have made it up, or they may have misremembered Zach's exact words. For example, Zach could have said "No weapon" and they misremembered it as "No gun". Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable at the best of times.

I agree that eyewitness testimony can be unreliable - particularly in high stress situations. However, I do think that assuming the witness mis-remembered the event is as unfair to the eyewitness as assuming something about the defendant's motives or behavior is unfair to him.

 

[Madeleine74]

When ZA said he let Shayne hit it first, I do think he meant that he let Shayne rape her first but the term is not meant specifically to rape. I see young guys post on line all the time "I'd hit that". It's crude and gross but, in those instances, they just mean they would have sex with her. Of course, young guys are often not very, um, picky, so I guess that's not exactly a ringing endorsement. Ahem.

"Hit it" or "I'd hit that" is slang for sex.

We know Holly did not consent to having sex with her kidnappers (common sense here).

Therefore there was sex and it was not consensual. That's rape.

 

[kodi]

I'll be super clear when I say, The reason I find Zachary Adams GUILTY in this case is not because I am just trying to pin this on SOMEONE just because we need to find someone to do it.

I believe:

A). I am a critical thinker - yes, in opposition to a post here, you can believe ZA is guilty in this case and be a critical thinker at the same time. We are all of our own opinions.

B) you can be a woman, and not be emotionally drawn to "pinning" this crime on any random person (I would never do that.)

C) I hardly think these 4 were just chosen. They all implicated themselves (albeit I need to study Shayne's one time immunity revoked), but Dylan and Autry are absolutely clear. You don't make up that you were a part of a murder case just to see if someone will stick you with the death penalty or life in jail.

D) If you determine not guilty, you do have to consider multiple witnesses took the stand, saying ZA claimed guilt. I can't, in good conscious throw out all those witnesses testimony and think every convo Zach had with these folks is bragging. I don't buy that. Corey? Nope. If you are saying guilty you don't believe one of them. In addition to the fact that he said "no gun, no body" 4 months before she was found. I believe yes, that Zachary Adams was proud he did it. Even more reason he should not get away with a "not guilty".

B) IMHO, I believe Shayne took her ---not someone "other than the 4". This was corroborated by Candace, the Coon Hunt, he sketch drawn of him matching his picture and overall Clint's description. There is a bigger deal at play to me here as far as the actual abduction and these details don't have to be perfect to make me think he is less than absolutely guilty of the crime.

I will repeat that ----the details we don't have of the actual abduction part do not have to be there to make Zachary Adams guilty. There is enough corroborated evidence leading up to the abduction and after the abduction to convict.

C) I am praying this is not a hung jury. But with the passion expressed on both sides here, it seems there are some passionate folks on both sides.

If Zachary Adams walks, for me, it is as bad as OJ walking but worse because there are 4 individuals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great post! [emoji1316][emoji1316][emoji1316]

 

[Madeleine74]

"I'll put you in a hole next to her" says nothing about *her being in a hole.*

That's an assumption being made but that's not what ZA said. You can be in a hole, next to someone's remains (bones by then), that are not in a hole.

No one knows if HB's body was loosely covered up with leaves and such and over the years all that flotsam was blown away and/or disturbed by animals.

All that's known is her remains were found on the surface.

And here's some more common sense: why would Zach be threatening his brother in the first place? If Zach's innocent and not involved in any crime then who cares if his brother is yapping. Zach cared because he was very much involved and that's why he wanted his brother dead.

 

[Mightymight]

Does anyone else find it unlikely that these men were driving around with what was obviously a body in the back of their truck, then possibly dismembering and scattering body parts in different locations, whilst there was an amber alert and hundreds of people were searching by for Holly? They'd have to be pretty lucky for no one at all to spot them acting suspiciously.

Also, something bothered me about Corey Rivers' testimony. He has that Zach told him about a video that was right under the state's noses. He asked Rivers if Rivers had a YouTube account, and said he would phone Rivers once Rivers was out of jail so Rivers could see it. Rivers, being by a good Christian, went to the authorities and told them all this. Then when he was released, Zach did try to phone him but he didn't answer because he didn't have any credit on his phone. And that was the end of that. Seriously!?! The state knew that Zach had supposedly promised to show Rivers the video and they didn't do anything about it?!? They could made sure that Rivers took that call, or that Rivers phoned Zach, and could have recorded the conversation and possibly be led to the video at last. Instead, they did nothing. The story doesn't add up at all.

My very strong opinion is they LE has the video, but it was ruled inadmissible in a sealed pre-trial motion. There is so much more evidence that we have not been allowed to see (i.e. that tip that came in that changed the focus of the investigation)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[maskedwoman]

"Hit it" or "I'd hit that" is slang for sex.

We know Holly did not consent to having sex with her kidnappers (common sense here).

Therefore there was sex and it was not consensual. That's rape.

I agree. I just meant that the term does not always refer to rape. I see guys use it just to refer to sex in general all the time.

 

[Harmony 2]

link link

 

[Terrib11]

Drug addicted people do not act/react like normal people. My daughter has been addicted/alcoholic for 15+ years. Her husband was also addicted - pot, alcohol, Meth when he could get it. I have seen drastically different and scary behaviour from them depending on what drugs they were on. When my daughter is drunk, she is the nastiest, most hateful person and completely out of her head. She doesn't just pass out, she sleeps for a couple of hours and wakes up with this personality change. I have seen her husband become terribly paranoid and violent from Meth and pot combo on more than one occasion. When you are an addict, you spend your life figuring out how you are going to get more drugs/alcohol either by stealing, begging, selling yourself, whatever it takes. Holding a job for most is impossible. My son in law finally got a sawed off shotgun and held up a gas station. When my daughter called me the next day and told me, I called the police immediately. He's now serving 7 years and she's in jail for probation violation. It's the best place for both of them.

I'm an Accountant for a non-profit - this is not how my daughter was raised and I will never understand exactly what happened, but I'm raising her 8 year old son and living life just fine.

 

[tandt]

Did the jury see a photo or photos of ZA around the arrest time? With that meth face and much different build, he looked downright scary. During the trial, even beyond being put in a suit, he looked like he could be the good boy next door.

 

[Gardenista]

My very strong opinion is they LE has the video, but it was ruled inadmissible in a sealed pre-trial motion. There is so much more evidence that we have not been allowed to see (i.e. that tip that came in that changed the focus of the investigation)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Since I've not followed this case, I was unaware of this tip. Have authorities spoke of it and said no info can be provided about it, or is there just speculation that there must have been a tip for them to start looking closely at ZA and the rest of them?

 

[turaj]

that is concerning an indicative of some long deliberations.

one has to consider that the poll is from most not from the general area...have not watched the ENTIRE trial or have had a chance to read so much out there on the net pro and con...the jury is in a different place and hopefully will bring a guilty verdict home for "A-Train"

 

[Mightymight]

Since I've not followed this case, I was unaware of this tip. Have authorities spoke of it and said no info can be provided about it, or is there just speculation that there must have been a tip for them to start looking closely at ZA and the rest of them?

TBI special agent Booth said it during testimony. It was not elaborated on, most likely due to hearsay. Just said it refocused the case on the 4 (ZA, DA, JA, and SA). The tip came before all the raids and various immunity agreements.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[maskedwoman]

Since I've not followed this case, I was unaware of this tip. Have authorities spoke of it and said no info can be provided about it, or is there just speculation that there must have been a tip for them to start looking closely at ZA and the rest of them?

Agent Booth from the TBI testified that they got a phone call in January or February of 2014 that focused their attention back on these 4.