www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index www.justiceforchandra.com
Justice for Chandra Levy and missing women
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Guandique trial
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 23, 24, 25, 26  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Murder on a Horse Trail
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9246
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Minos Nicolas!!!! Is this Errol Thompson, the sports club manager.

I think we got spoofed by the Washington Post on this, kate. When I re-read the news report, I see that they quoted sports club manager Errol Thompson but didn't directly say he was or wasn't the guy who handled Chandra's cancellation paperwork.

That turned out to be this Minos guy who didn't want to be named by ABC. When I reviewed statements involving Errol Thompson I see that everyone was fooled by the Washington Post, and they apparently wanted it that way. Nothing was ever said to clarify it.

Of course later the Washington Post turned out to be little more than a Pravda for the US government to poison the minds of DC residents, where we got our lovely pool of stooges.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9246
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Condit, he alleges not to have seen Chandra for some time before she disappeared, however, are we to believe that Chandra was saving the underpants like Monica saved her dress. Obviously Chandra had seen Condit very recently before she disappeared.

The jury should have been pounded on by a hard bitten defense lawyer that would make their stupid brains dizzy with what actually happened.

The underwear was taken from her dirty laundry. The "half packed" bag was actually Chandra removing her clothes from Condit's when his wife came into town. Why did she come into town? Not for any reason that involved purchasing a ticket ahead of time.

from chapter Big News:
There was another reason Chandra would need to return to her apartment. Carolyn Condit, the Congressman's wife, was making a rare visit. She was coming to Washington to attend the annual First Lady's Luncheon on May 2, with an invitation to serve on the luncheon's organizing committee.

Anne Marie called Condit and told him she had a few days off and could see him, but Condit told her it was not a good time, his wife was coming to town to see a doctor. In the Larry King Live interview with Anne Marie Smith, Roger Cossack indicates that Anne Marie arrived in Washington April 25 but Carolyn didn't arrive until April 28. Anne Marie tells Cossack:

Actually he called me when his wife was in town that
weekend. He called me, I believe it was Friday
night, he called me Saturday, he called me Sunday
morning, and then he called me the following week.
[14]

It appears that Anne Marie was in town Wednesday and Thursday, offering to see him, but Condit didn't call her until Friday for some reason. During these same days an interesting call was made, according to a D.C. police leak reported by Niles Lathem of the New York Post. A five minute call was made from the Condit's Ceres home to Condit's Adams Morgan condo at a time when Condit said he wasn't home. Who answered it, and what was said? Carolyn arrived in Washington just a couple of days after the call. Had her flight ticket been purchased before the call?

It is odd that Condit didn't pay for Carolyn's luncheon ticket until the following year, when they also paid for the next year's luncheon ticket. [15] Why would they pay for the 2001 luncheon a year later but pay for the 2002 luncheon in advance?

One reasonable explanation is that Carolyn Condit never planned on attending the First Lady's Luncheon, a luncheon held a few days after that phone call, a luncheon held the day after Chandra disappeared.


Chandra cleared her stuff out of Condit's apartment only a few days before she disappeared, after a phone call took place that no one can explain and Condit's wife flew into town for the first time in anyone's memory.

Most of the politicians around Condit thought she was bedridden with a fatal disease. So did his mistresses.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9246
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am shocked that a jury could convict on such sparse information, I have heard of circumstantial evidence convicting criminals, however it is beyond the beyonds how little information there is in this case, and the suspect credibility of the witness, just my view, but I could not in conscience convicted someone of murder with so little information, and with such a suspect witness, and the bungled job of the DC police. Not a chance I would take that leap....

Little more than a lynching. I would say they should be ashamed of themselves but they're too stupid to realize it.

What a herculean effort to sift through all the information of the trial of Guandique.

It is, for people like you that understand the details. Unfortunately, there weren't any people in the courtroom like that.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
peripeteia



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 1176
Location: Nova Scotia

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:14 am    Post subject: Veracity of Anne Marie Smith and Gary Condit Reply with quote

rd wrote:
Condit, he alleges not to have seen Chandra for some time before she disappeared, however, are we to believe that Chandra was saving the underpants like Monica saved her dress. Obviously Chandra had seen Condit very recently before she disappeared.

The jury should have been pounded on by a hard bitten defense lawyer that would make their stupid brains dizzy with what actually happened.

The underwear was taken from her dirty laundry. The "half packed" bag was actually Chandra removing her clothes from Condit's when his wife came into town. Why did she come into town? Not for any reason that involved purchasing a ticket ahead of time.

from chapter Big News:
There was another reason Chandra would need to return to her apartment. Carolyn Condit, the Congressman's wife, was making a rare visit. She was coming to Washington to attend the annual First Lady's Luncheon on May 2, with an invitation to serve on the luncheon's organizing committee.

Anne Marie called Condit and told him she had a few days off and could see him, but Condit told her it was not a good time, his wife was coming to town to see a doctor. In the Larry King Live interview with Anne Marie Smith, Roger Cossack indicates that Anne Marie arrived in Washington April 25 but Carolyn didn't arrive until April 28. Anne Marie tells Cossack:

Actually he called me when his wife was in town that
weekend. He called me, I believe it was Friday
night, he called me Saturday, he called me Sunday
morning, and then he called me the following week.
[14]

It appears that Anne Marie was in town Wednesday and Thursday, offering to see him, but Condit didn't call her until Friday for some reason. During these same days an interesting call was made, according to a D.C. police leak reported by Niles Lathem of the New York Post. A five minute call was made from the Condit's Ceres home to Condit's Adams Morgan condo at a time when Condit said he wasn't home. Who answered it, and what was said? Carolyn arrived in Washington just a couple of days after the call. Had her flight ticket been purchased before the call?

It is odd that Condit didn't pay for Carolyn's luncheon ticket until the following year, when they also paid for the next year's luncheon ticket. [15] Why would they pay for the 2001 luncheon a year later but pay for the 2002 luncheon in advance?

One reasonable explanation is that Carolyn Condit never planned on attending the First Lady's Luncheon, a luncheon held a few days after that phone call, a luncheon held the day after Chandra disappeared.


Chandra cleared her stuff out of Condit's apartment only a few days before she disappeared, after a phone call took place that no one can explain and Condit's wife flew into town for the first time in anyone's memory.

Most of the politicians around Condit thought she was bedridden with a fatal disease. So did his mistresses.

rd


Anne Marie allegedly wrote Condit a note apologizing, wanting to make up to him, because she said, she was at his place over passover, and saw the restraints (ties) on the bed post and his offer for kinky sex, she freaked. So she sends him the letter, and then comes to see him in Washington although she alleged she was fearful of her life, what a pile of crap. If she was so afraid why did she return.

So she arrives, now we have Condit just coming back the 21st I think from California..

Chandras birthday

Chandra loses her internship

forget the sequence of all this information

Carolyn phones Condits flat and gets a woman, allegedly

could have been Anne Marie, could have been Chandra, might not have happened at all...

So Anne Marie has come especially to see Condit on her vacation after writing him the letter, Anne Marie gave out his information in her first interview, and in part was reprinted in the Newspapers.

Why I am going on about this, is that I never believe Anne Maries version of things, and Condit we absolutely know not to be believed. My point is that Anne Marie arrives and wont go away. So what are we to believe that she is doing, going to the Smithsonian, I doubt she has ever been there. Chandra during the days was sightseeing a bit. I believe that Anne Marie and Condit did see one another, both are such liars as not to be believed.

The one remarkable thing about Condits alibi, for me it I have never been able to solve where he went after the meeting with Cheney. He should have been at the California energy hearing, which commenced at 1 p.m. and went for 2 and a half days, everyone but everyone was there, Condit had and an appointment with the President the day before, and the next day with Cheney to talk about the Hearings, and the situation in California. So then Condit does not go to the hearings!!!!!!!!....all the house reps, senate members, and governor, everyone was there, I listened to the tapes....on the US gov site...so where was condit

So it seems he had a sudden change of plans...and he has yet to explain himself, as to his whereabouts, and should have been required to do that in court instead of the DNA on the panties thing....

I fully believe two things are possible, Condit was to meet Chandra in Rock Creek Park, at the mansion or somewhere near, go horse back riding, bike riding, Condit did say he went bike riding in the park... And if so, he could never admit it, well he might just have to say where he was if there is a miss trial in Grandiquès case. Because there is no other believable reason Chandra would have been where she was, in the park. It maybe that they planned to go horse back riding, and Chandra was to meet him there....

Other than that I believe Chandra died the night before at the time of the scream. The first scenario may involve Grandique, although the profile does not fit, being high on Methamphedimine could make the pope into a deamon. The second scenario does not involve Grandique.

If Chandras computer had been left on, I can see that someone could from a remote setting trash her hard drive, but it seems obvious someone broke into Chandras place and did just that.

The note is a mystery........I would love to know in whose hand this is...seems odd that it would be chandras, unless given to her, because her father being such a specialist, Chandra had to be well informed about medical things, and no need to write it down on a scrap of paper...makes no sense...could be related to drugs, sexual near death experience....seems out of place, seems like it belongs to someone else....

AT the end of the day, we still do not know what happened, and are left to guess, but I d go for a miss trail, re: DNA evidence contaminated and lack of evidence.....I can believe that GRandique is guilty, but only if Chandra was to meet Condit in the Park, there is absolutely no other explanation for Chandra not bringing her phone. (unless she had two phones) She had to be meeting someone she knew, someone she wanted to see very much....


The only other way I can conceive that Chandra ended up in the park is that her body was dumped there.

We see the incompetence of a whole system gone to hell in a handbasket, from the get go, everything in this case was done poorly, perhaps it is just a micro version of what is wrong with the rest of the world, but anything that could go wrong did go wrong.

I totally believe that Grandique is entitled to a new trail, and not one held in a washington kangaroo court. I am gob struck at the jury, there is no way there is enough evidence to convict someone of murder.
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peripeteia



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 1176
Location: Nova Scotia

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:53 am    Post subject: Video of the Alleged Crime Scene Rock Creek Park Reply with quote

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tWzIx8aWcU

Video of where Chandra was attacked and where her remains were found in Rock Creek Park, one gets a good idea of the terrain, and also, how close the road was at the bottom of the hill. Making it difficult to believe that a dog did not discover her remains before hand.


If Chandra was dragged unconscious down the hill, her sneakers would have been found near the top of the hill. It is easy to see how her body might have been rolled down the hill from the path. Also, given the pitch of the hill, it would have given Chandra an opportunity to get away, having the advantage of being in great physical shape, the hill would have been to Chandras advantage, as the predator would have had difficulty keeping their balance, part of the hill is of a pitch of 9 out of 9 grade....one is hardly able to stand up straight.

Given Grandiques size it would have been very difficult for him to hold Chandra in check with a knife on that hill. One could have used the defence, that they only meant to rob her, manslaughter.....and that rolling down the hill, her neck was broken or she had gotten stabbed....bad defense this guy had. Because it seems if he was guilty, that he should have pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of manslaughter, because have an altercation on that hill, would have been very precarious indeed.

I wonder if anyone tried to roll down a 110-115 lb dummy down the hill from the path where chandra was attacked, my guess it would have landed near the log in the video, and elements and animals washed the rest of Chandras remains down the hill...
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9246
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, there are trees staggered all the way downhill. A body wouldn't roll and slide very far.

You mention Chandra meeting Condit a couple of times. Important to note that Chandra had no way to go meet Condit somewhere far off the Metro. Condit almost undoubtedly picked her up in his car. No one will address where that car was that afternoon, whether it had Congressional parking sticker and could have been parked in Condit's congressional reserved spot, and all the other questions I pose in Murder in a Horse Trail.

Too close to an investigation for DC.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
sigsky



Joined: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 209
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why couldn't Chandra have been picked up by a third party known both to her and Condit in an arrangement to meet him somewhere? Maybe at the Klingle Mansion.

I feel it unlikely she was killed at her apartment. I think assuming that the trail of visited web sites was a ruse is a stretch.

Personally, I like the theory that she was killed in Luray, Va and then dumped in RCP. That brings a lot of elements of the story into the picture. I'd appreciate someone poking some holes in this theory so I can give it up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9246
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

well, it's interesting, sigsky. I have always thought that Darrell would be that third party. If he has an alibi for that time period no one has seen fit to mention it.

I also think that it's not a coincidence that Carolyn flew in at that time and Darrell supposedly didn't show up for his temp job for a few days.

I know Condit didn't go off to Luray in those five and half hours, and also sure that Chandra was to meet him to discuss whatever the big news she had for her aunt Linda, undoubtedly from Condit as she would not mention to her parents. They obviously had a major falling out over Condit with about the last thing Chandra telling them was that Condit had explained it all about OC's story of his daughter and Condit. (That he was delusional I expect would be Condit's explanation.) She did talk to her mother the Friday night before she disappeared but had no info for them about coming home for the graduation.

I also expect that Chandra wouldn't be surprised that Condit would tell her that an associate would pick her up, as far as I know she didn't know that Condit had a car. They always rode in cabs while Condit often drove his car with Anne Marie.

What transpired from there? I don't know. I think it was to be the equivalent of an intervention because Chandra had confronted Carolyn about Condit as she told Sven she would. With an unhappy Chandra who could start talking about the Jennifer Thomas story and how she had been mistreated with the stories told her about a dying Carolyn and promise of marriage, she was a loose cannon. He had to be promising her a job in DC or something to try to keep her loyalty, something that would be big news for Linda, but whatever happened didn't go well.

I also think the missing expensive watch is part of this, in my opinion something to Darrell to pawn for his help. Not to mention Darrell owed him big time for keeping him out of jail, and then was bailed out a few months later when a manhunt was on for Darrell and found at a motel in Ft. Lauderdale. The bail amount was substantial and lost as anyone would expect. Only Condit would have put up that money and retained a former Watergate lawyer to go down and bail Darrell out. You can imagine how badly he didn't want Darrell talking.

For that matter I never heard how Darrell resolved two warrants seeking his arrest for jail terms, one in Florida and one in Stanislaus County, Ca. Suffice that it all went away I guess.

Just like Chandra.

In my opinion Condit went right to Luray when a search warrant was sought by DC police and US Attorney, the same people set on pinning this on Guandique, intervened and stopped it. Police still searched dumpster behind Condit's condo building and Condit left House floor and straight to Luray, making a phone call at midnight he didn't know could be identified.

This was two weeks after Chandra disappeared, and in my opinion no way was Chandra in Rock Creek Park on that hillside when everyone was looking for her there after she disappeared.

So, yes, I think he secretly went straight to Luray for some reason related to Chandra's disappearance.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Rainbow



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 870
Location: THE LEFT COAST

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 7:41 pm    Post subject: Questioning the Questionnaires Reply with quote

Appeal Filed Over Juror Questionnaires in Chandra Levy Case
January 3, 2011
by Michael Doyle--McClatchy Newspapers

In a fight pitting juror privacy against public curiosity, the Washington Post is appealing a judge's decision not to disclose contents of juror questionnaires. The trial judge says 12 jurors unanimously wanted the questionnaires kept secret.And,

. . .
"Getting to the issue of what the jurors knew about this case, or didn't know, and their thinking based upon that was of particular concern to us," Fisher stated.

Fisher explained his reasoning in a Nov. 24 hearing, the transcript of which was included in the Washington Post's quietly filed Dec. 23 appeal. Fisher further stated that he did not want to renege on his promise to jurors that the questionnaires would remain secret.

"I believe that the First Amendment requires that the court look for less restrictive means than blanket withholding of information," the Post's attorney, Patrick J. Carome, retorted during the hearing, the transcript shows.

Carome added that "the privacy issues can be addressed by withholding the particular information that was so sensitive that there was a privacy interest that trumps the First Amendment interest in access."

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/03/106115/washington-post-seeks-jury-questionnaires.html#ixzz1AOb0U9Fe


Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/03/106115/washington-post-seeks-jury-questionnaires.html#ixzz1AOaHDlk3
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rainbow



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 870
Location: THE LEFT COAST

PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:04 pm    Post subject: Guandique Case-Polygraph Revisited Reply with quote

October 24, 2010
Chandra Levy Murder Trial Begins
Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog


http://74.6.239.185/search/srpcache?ei=UTF-8&p=highbeam-guandique+appeal&fr=ush-mailc&u=http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=highbeam-guandique+appeal&d=4585607888176882&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-
US&w=8c936edd,387ecdc&icp=1&.intl=us&sig=.n7Ek37rTsxmcekWROfhAQ--

Quote:
Meantime, Guandique maintains that he is innocent of Levy’s murder. In 2002, Guandique did not fail a polygraph test when he was questioned about whether he had any information about Levy’s disappearance. After the polygraph, the lead prosecutor on Guandique’s assault case told a judge that there was “no suggestion” that Guandique played a role in the Levy killing. Also, Guandique’s defense team have questioned the police investigation, including a memo that cleared Guandique and another man of any match in fingerprints found on a vehicle that was parked close to the crime scene.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rainbow



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 870
Location: THE LEFT COAST

PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:58 pm    Post subject: Stacking the Deck against Guandique Reply with quote

Defense says Levy wasn't killed in park Article from:The Washington Post Article date:October 24, 2009

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-20925458.html

THE DISTRICT

The attorneys for Ingmar Guandique told a D.C. Superior Court judge Friday that they believe Chandra Levy was killed somewhere other than Rock Creek Park, where the former congressional intern's remains were found.

Maria Hawilo of the Public Defender Service asked Judge Geoffrey M. Alprin to require the government to submit more than 82 pieces of evidence found not only in Rock Creek Park, where authorities discovered Levy's remains a year after she disappeared in May 2001, but also items found in Levy's apartment and the apartment of then- Rep. Gary A. Condit (D-Calif.), with whom Levy was having an affair.

Hawilo said Guandique's attorneys want to test and review items from areas outside the park because "we don't believe the park is the crime scene." Guandique, 28, was arrested in April and charged with first-degree murder in Levy's killing.

Prosecutors alleged Guandique killed Levy while she was jogging in the park. They objected to the request, saying the defense was asking for the items to delay the trial, which is scheduled for Jan. 27.

Alprin rejected Hawilo's request and signed an order that required prosecutors to turn over only evidence found in the park near where the remains were discovered.

-- Keith L. Alexander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peripeteia



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 1176
Location: Nova Scotia

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:24 am    Post subject: Not enough evidence for 1st degree murder Reply with quote

What I find rather perplexing, is how did the jury arrived at 1st degree murder, and why wasn't Grandique offered a plea bargin re: second degree, manslaughter, accidental murder.....

I doubt very much Grandique decided he was going to kill someone that day, if in fact he did it at all. His subsequent behavior defies this, especially when he was caught in the neighbours place stealing her ring. He made no attempt to even attack her never mind murder her.

There seems to be a total miscarriage of justice and as you pointed out rd there seems to be vital information that was not present to the jury, i.e photo no markings re: defense wounds.

Also, the polygraph. There seems also to be little information given about the witnesses, and the fact that several witnesses refused to testify.

I believe that in order for there to be an appeal, some error in law has to have occurred, is not with holding of evidence not ground, and the fact that he was so poorly represented, re: the defense lawyer should have brought this to the attention of the jury.

rd, not only do I wonder where Darrell was but where was Burl?! Chandra might have agreed to see either Brother, at the K. Mansion, in fact might
not have Carolyn sent a messenger on her behalf, to tell Chandra to bugger off...

There is something very odd, in fact hardly believable that Chandra went strolling about in the park, on a path, off a path off a trail, without phone, dressed inappropriately for the weather. It almost seems like she had the same clothes on as she did the night before, fanny pack included. There seems to be rather strong evidence Chandra was not even murdered in the park. As stated, by many.

It would be very interesting to hear what Grandique has to say, in fact I'm surprized no one has done a post facto interview with him from prison. Also, wonder what kind of a deal Morales got, besides the one he made with the devil?
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Peri! About Chandra's clothing, here's something I posted 30 Oct 2010 in this thread:

Quote:
In the past, we didn't know whether the shirt Chandra wore to the gym was the same one found at the recovery site - now we know she wore a pink sweatshirt to the gym and that a gray teeshirt was found at the recovery site (of course, it's possible she had the pink sweatshirt over the gray teeshirt while at the gym April 30).

_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sigsky



Joined: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 209
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:12 am    Post subject: Witnesses refusing to testify Reply with quote

I'm aware that there were several witnesses who did not testify. I had assumed that the prosecution felt that they would not sufficiently help his case so he didn't call them. If its true that they refused to testify, that is indeed curious and deserves some explanation. I agree that first degree murder is a stretch, but given that DC does not have the death penalty, it probably doesn't make a difference in the sentence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Sigsky and Peri!

I really believe, Peri, as I have stated earlier, that the outcome of this trial was predetermined. All throughout the pretrial hearings when the defense had reason to ask for all charges to be dropped, the judge would say, "this trial is going forward" or something to that effect. To me, it's as though he had his orders on this one.

Whoever was giving the judge his orders initially thought Guandique's defense would jump at a deal - they really didn't expect or want a trial.

But once the defense dug in and it was clear they were not about to plea for a deal, there WOULD be a trail, and the verdict WOULD be guilty. That is what I believe.

By all analyses of all the learned pundits in the media, the prosecution had a very flimsy case. Yet the prosecutors on video looked as carefree as kids on a picnic. Clearly they had no concern whatsoever.

It is difficult to see how a jury could be coerced - I believe it was done by planting one juror whose background and bearing would make him/her a sure bet for foreman/woman and one or more others to encourage the rest to follow the main plant.

The foreman/woman would guide the deliberations, reining in the other jurors whenever they strayed too far in certain directions (yet allowing them to feel they explored all pertinent avenues).

Of course this is just my opinion, but I really do believe this is what happened.
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Murder on a Horse Trail All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 23, 24, 25, 26  Next
Page 24 of 26

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group