8/30 thru 11/9 (Jury selection George Thomas' trial)

[bhardy1956]

Ok, I am new to this thread, but did a little research on this horrific crime. My question is why have they had separate trials for these monsters? Why didn't they all have just one trial and get it over with?

I am so sad, that humans can act this way! Wait! They aren't humans!

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Originally Posted by bhardy1956

Ok, I am new to this thread, but did a little research on this horrific crime. My question is why have they had separate trials for these monsters? Why didn't they all have just one trial and get it over with?

I am so sad, that humans can act this way! Wait! They aren't humans!

Hi bhardy..That point you just made also irked us too..as having these 4 hour separate trials we know has to be torture to the Christians and the Newsoms..however they were severed way back when as the finger pointing started from the giddy up..

Having watched 2 of the four so far..I think jurors could have figured it out, however, the judicial system must allow each defendent's defense team to run their cases according to their particular client's culpibilities.
Each defense team..suggest the other guy did it..or planned it or controlled it or heck..their client wasnt even there...LOL So it goes..

Anyway, so far so good...

Hope to see ya on the threads when the next trial gets started!!

LMS

[in4infor]

Ok I have not been here lately, but I did find this and wanted to share it.
http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/

http://www.smashsouthsports.org/foru...30&postcount=1

[Hedda Lettis]

in4infor, thank you so much for the link to the juror's statement. I am in awe of the jurors. And thankful that I wasn't on that jury. They did good....

[aubrey04]

Originally Posted by Lyndawitha"Y

Hey you guys...Jamie just said when she was signing off today, that they will be covering the Cobbin's trial next week...also mentioning that it is the final week for "Insessions" or CourtTV..Interesting..wonder if that means this forum will shut down too..or if HLN will be taking over trials?..Now Im getting nervous...

LMS

Wow. I just saw that CW made this a trial thread! I really wish they would have covered Rome's trial when it was live, rather than having it as a canned trial.

Will you guys be watching it again? I don't think I can stand listening to the defense lawyers try to make excuses and diminish Cobbins' part in this horrific crime... There is nothing mitigating in terms of Rome's participation, IMO. He was second in command, next to ringleader Davidson.

It will be interesting to see the defense attorneys try to downplay his involvement, especially Jami and her frequent guests... don't know if I can stomach that nonsense.

[kellann62]

I cant stomach a rerun of that trial. I watched it on WBIR and would not do that again. I know how it played out.

Kel

[jakee]

Originally Posted by aubrey04

Wow. I just saw that CW made this a trial thread! I really wish they would have covered Rome's trial when it was live, rather than having it as a canned trial.

Will you guys be watching it again? I don't think I can stand listening to the defense lawyers try to make excuses and diminish Cobbins' part in this horrific crime... There is nothing mitigating in terms of Rome's participation, IMO. He was second in command, next to ringleader Davidson.

It will be interesting to see the defense attorneys try to downplay his involvement, especially Jami and her frequent guests... don't know if I can stomach that nonsense.

I will probably watch again. It will be interesting to see what the TH's say and if any new posters to the case will watch. Jami will drive me crazy though.

[wnb]

Aside from a few short segments back in the spring of 2007, this case has never had any national TV exposure. Even a taped replay of the Cobbins trial on In Session will change that.

[aubrey04]

Originally Posted by jakee

I will probably watch again. It will be interesting to see what the TH's say and if any new posters to the case will watch. Jami will drive me crazy though.

Jami is going to really test my limits, I am sure. I wonder if the Newsom's and the Christian's will be watching? For their sake, I hope they don't... at least Jami's show.

The legal analyst of one local news show ticked the families off so bad.. I can't imagine what Jami's nonsense will do to them.

[aubrey04]

Originally Posted by in4infor

Ok I have not been here lately, but I did find this and wanted to share it.
http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/

http://www.smashsouthsports.org/foru...30&postcount=1

Thanks for the links.

That juror has some great comments. It seems like I keep learning new factoids about this case as I go along.. He mentioned that Lemaricus called Daphne from Chris' phone.. I guess I missed that testimony. Very small detail but just another nail in his coffin, which I had missed.

[wnb]

Originally Posted by aubrey04

Jami is going to really test my limits, I am sure. I wonder if the Newsom's and the Christian's will be watching? For their sake, I hope they don't... at least Jami's show.

The legal analyst of one local news show ticked the families off so bad.. I can't imagine what Jami's nonsense will do to them.

It was a local defense attorney acting as a legal analyst on one of the Knoxville TV stations. He said that the defense lawyers were doing a good job defending their client by suggesting that the couple was in East Knoxville looking for drugs and explaining the DNA by inferring that Channon had "consensual sex" with Davidson. Channon's father did not like this very much.

[aubrey04]

Originally Posted by wnb

It was a local defense attorney acting as a legal analyst on one of the Knoxville TV stations. He said that the defense lawyers were doing a good job defending their client by suggesting that the couple was in East Knoxville looking for drugs and explaining the DNA by inferring that Channon had "consensual sex" with Davidson. Channon's father did not like this very much.

Yeah, I wouldn't like that much either. I know that legal analysts are supposed to be non-biased and point out the strengths and weaknesses in each trial, but boy.. I just could not be the one to do it.

Personally, I think it is absurd that the local defense atty believed that it was a good job, but they all seem to stick up for one another.. at least that's the way it seems to me.



Anyone know where we can watch InSessions online? Someone posted a link in one of threads of a different trial & I didn't bookmark it.

[jakee]

Aubrey, I don't know of a link for insessions online.

Well, so far I have been listening to Ashleigh and she is sickened and actually said "Effing"

Of course the defense dude on her panel said TK was boring.

[aubrey04]

Originally Posted by jakee

Aubrey, I don't know of a link for insessions online.

Well, so far I have been listening to Ashleigh and she is sickened and actually said "Effing"

Of course the defense dude on her panel said TK was boring.

I just heard Ashleigh say that...

and that defense attorney better be nice to our TK...

[jakee]

I am trying to follow Ashleigh's facebook. kind of hard because you have to refresh and then scroll back up to see the comments you missed. Unless I am doing it wrong. LOL

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Originally Posted by aubrey04

I just heard Ashleigh say that...

and that defense attorney better be nice to our TK...

Good Morning aubrey..and jakee too! Yikes Ashley is wow...rather angry..eh?..and the Def Attny guest is really coming across funny to me! I think the shrink gal (Saunders?) hit it on the head tho..He is angry about TK's form not the substance....LOL..Wasnt he just saying TK wasnt riling up the jury enough..How better to do that and give them some of the facts!!! and to correct that form..All she had to have said was "The evidence will show"...!! So ???? Where's the beef Mr. Def. Man???

Sorry havent got their names (TH's) straight yet!!

LMS

[starbright]

I am so glad TruTV is airing this trial. I live in west TN and until I saw the references on this board I had never heard one word in the newspaper, TV or radio re this case. Of course, this has been discussed many times before, but I think this was a true case of the media attempting to quash these terrible, terrible crimes.

I will be watching these next two trials, as I am sure, will all of you.

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Yikes..I just noticed the pic they are showing on InSession of Chris and Channon..that Chris looks just like Andy Roddick in his younger days...and Channon looks like Christine Rommans a TV anchor of CNN..

LMS

[cog1]

Originally Posted by aubrey04

Thanks for the links.

That juror has some great comments. It seems like I keep learning new factoids about this case as I go along.. He mentioned that Lemaricus called Daphne from Chris' phone.. I guess I missed that testimony. Very small detail but just another nail in his coffin, which I had missed.

Hi Aubrey,

What is standing out to me and I'm not finished reading that post but this. The women jurors could not find that LD was responsible for the crime of raping Chris.

What bothers we about that is will we see more women jurors next time and will they do the same?

AMOO Oh, good morning everyone!!

[aubrey04]

Originally Posted by Lyndawitha"Y

Good Morning aubrey..and jakee too! Yikes Ashley is wow...rather angry..eh?..and the Def Attny guest is really coming across funny to me! I think the shrink gal (Saunders?) hit it on the head tho..He is angry about TK's form not the substance....LOL..Wasnt he just saying TK wasnt riling up the jury enough..How better to do that and give them some of the facts!!! and to correct that form..All she had to have said was "The evidence will show"...!! So ???? Where's the beef Mr. Def. Man???

Sorry havent got their names (TH's) straight yet!!

LMS

Yup. Imagine if she heard Eldridge & Trant's defense.. Her head would fly off.. She's irate.. And the psychiatrist is shaking her head.. She looks sickened and she said she's been in the business for 30 years.. I am sure she's heard a lot.

Wow.. Even the defense atty just said that if this guy doesn't get the DP -- then the prosecutor has lost this case.. Yikes.

[aubrey04]

Originally Posted by cog1

Hi Aubrey,

What is standing out to me and I'm not finished reading that post but this. The women jurors could not find that LD was responsible for the crime of raping Chris.

What bothers we about that is will we see more women jurors next time and will they do the same?

AMOO Oh, good morning everyone!!

Yes, I read that, cog1. I really didn't understand their stance, at least how it was explained from the juror/writer of that post.

[aubrey04]

Originally Posted by starbright

I am so glad TruTV is airing this trial. I live in west TN and until I saw the references on this board I had never heard one word in the newspaper, TV or radio re this case. Of course, this has been discussed many times before, but I think this was a true case of the media attempting to quash these terrible, terrible crimes.

I will be watching these next two trials, as I am sure, will all of you.

I will watch every single trial, unless something prevents me. I plan to see this through to the end. I've read about some disgusting crimes before this is truly one of the most vile, barbaric,sadistic ones I have seen.

Can't believe you didn't hear about it and it was in your own state.. I actually came across the story while I was reading about another case that is nicknamed The Wichita Massacre.. That crime is on the same level as this one.. just perverse and disgusting.imo.

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Originally Posted by cog1

Hi Aubrey,

What is standing out to me and I'm not finished reading that post but this. The women jurors could not find that LD was responsible for the crime of raping Chris.

What bothers we about that is will we see more women jurors next time and will they do the same?

AMOO Oh, good morning everyone!!

Mornin cog..I read that post too..and got the impression that the whole jury panel believed LC was guilty..however when they had to go down that long list of each and every charge, they stepped back and looked at the evidence to see if proved beyong reasonable doubt..Sometimes the CSI affect makes some juror's need forensic proof of who did eactly what..and if they dont see it, they compromise abit on that particular charge....It must have been overwhelming for all of them!!

If their only question was "Did LC/LD take part in the crime as a whole?" and not required to decide on each and every element of that crme..they would have been back in that courtroom with a verdict in 2 minutes..Guilty...As it is, too fast verdicts are sometimes "Appellable" if appellate court deems jury misconduct..ala No deliberation claim by defense...it becomes a mistrial..

I dont know, but sometimes even on this board during some trials, there are some posters who say things similar..like I think they did it, but dont think it has been proven...BYRD

LMS

[cog1]

Originally Posted by aubrey04

Yes, I read that, cog1. I really didn't understand their stance, at least how it was explained from the juror/writer of that post.

It was a little confusing wasn't it?

I think what he was saying if I understood him correctly was that the women couldn't place him there when Chris was raped. That scared me but who knows what will happen this time around.

AMOO

[cog1]

Originally Posted by Lyndawitha"Y

Mornin cog..I read that post too..and got the impression that the whole jury panel believed LC was guilty..however when they had to go down that long list of each and every charge, they stepped back and looked at the evidence to see if proved beyong reasonable doubt..Sometimes the CSI affect makes some juror's need forensic proof of who did eactly what..and if they dont see it, they compromise abit on that particular charge....It must have been overwhelming for all of them!!

If their only question was "Did LC/LD take part in the crime as a whole?" and not required to decide on each and every element of that crme..they would have been back in that courtroom with a verdict in 2 minutes..Guilty...As it is, too fast verdicts are sometimes "Appellable" if appellate court deems jury misconduct..ala No deliberation claim by defense...it becomes a mistrial..

I dont know, but sometimes even on this board during some trials, there are some posters who say things similar..like I think they did it, but dont think it has been proven...BYRD

LMS

Hi lyndawithay!
I don't know what their reasoning was but I got the impression that felt that it wasn't proven that LD was there when Chris was raped. I think he was but they needed more proof maybe?

It just scares me for future trials. And, any juror speaking out giving so much detail of what was discussed etc. will surely be dissected by the next defense attys.

AMOO

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Originally Posted by cog1

Hi lyndawithay!
I don't know what their reasoning was but I got the impression that felt that it wasn't proven that LD was there when Chris was raped. I think he was but they needed more proof maybe?

It just scares me for future trials. And, any juror speaking out giving so much detail of what was discussed etc. will surely be dissected by the next defense attys.

AMOO

I think they did believe Chris was raped..just wasnt proven WHO did that rape..The evidence was that there was semen..but no DNA found due to the degradation by the fire...Rape was proven, but not that LD did the actual rape...LD was found guilty on another level tho..facilitation of that rape ( at the very least) for not stopping it , allowing it to happen, etc....Or did I not understand all those guilty verdicts??...I know LC wasnt found guilty either of Chris's rape, because he was back at the house while Chris was removed to the train tracks...etc...

LMS

[cog1]

Originally Posted by Lyndawitha"Y

I think they did believe Chris was raped..just wasnt proven WHO did that rape..The evidence was that there was semen..but no DNA found due to the degradation by the fire...Rape was proven, but not that LD did the actual rape...LD was found guilty on another level tho..facilitation of that rape ( at the very least) for not stopping it , allowing it to happen, etc....Or did I not understand all those guilty verdicts??...I know LC wasnt found guilty either of Chris's rape, because he was back at the house while Chris was removed to the train tracks...etc...

LMS

Yes, that is correct. He was found guilty of facilitation. Maybe I read the juror's comment wrong. The meaning. I thought he was saying that the women jurors didn't think he was even THERE when the rape of Chris took place. I think he surely was! Still facilitation is better than nothing but not as much as I wanted.

AMOO

[Roux]

Originally Posted by aubrey04

Yes, I read that, cog1. I really didn't understand their stance, at least how it was explained from the juror/writer of that post.

I don't get that either because as we discussed a number times at the end of Cobbins, the state met the requirements under TN law. I finally just quit thinking about it becuse it upset me.

Regarding the juror's mentioning the Bible during sentencing deliberations, just a few days ago I read somewhere (it must have been a thread here as I've not been reading anywhere else recently)about a defense challenging a verdict because a Bible had been brought into the jury room. The appeal was not upheld, but I can sure see Eldridge and Trant pouncing on it.

[cog1]

Originally Posted by Roux

I don't get that either because as we discussed a number times at the end of Cobbins, the state met the requirements under TN law. I finally just quit thinking about it becuse it upset me.

Regarding the juror's mentioning the Bible during sentencing deliberations, just a few days ago I read somewhere (it must have been a thread here as I've not been reading anywhere else recently)about a defense challenging a verdict because a Bible had been brought into the jury room. The appeal was not upheld, but I can sure see Eldridge and Trant pouncing on it.

Are you kidding me the bible is not allowed in a jury room? I had no idea! I'm not questioning you Roux I just had not heard that before.

WOW

[Roux]

Originally Posted by cog1

Are you kidding me the bible is not allowed in a jury room? I had no idea! I'm not questioning you Roux I just had not heard that before.

WOW

Guess I need to go look for the details. The defense claim was that the jurors could not use the Bible in their deliberations. The jury said they did not "use" or "reference" the Bible, simply that it was in the room.

[cog1]

Originally Posted by Roux

Guess I need to go look for the details. The defense claim was that the jurors could not use the Bible in their deliberations. The jury said they did not "use" or "reference" the Bible, simply that it was in the room.

No need for a link. I'm sure these defense attorneys will go after that if they can.

Sickening huh? I'm sure they needed that bible for strength during this case and others!

AMOO

[Roux]

Originally Posted by cog1

No need for a link. I'm sure these defense attorneys will go after that if they can.

Sickening huh? I'm sure they needed that bible for strength during this case and others!

AMOO

A quick google and I saw two cases: one death sentence overturned, Harlan case in Colorado - one sentence upheld, Oliver in central Texas.
Both cases involved Bibles in jury room.

[cog1]

Originally Posted by Roux

A quick google and I saw two cases: one death sentence overturned, Harlan case in Colorado - one sentence upheld, Oliver in central Texas.
Both cases involved Bibles in jury room.

OMG now I am scared to death!! That is so sad what are the grounds do you know off hand?

TIA I can google it so it's ok. No need to explain. Our justice system sure is a wreck if you ask me!!

AMOO

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Originally Posted by cog1

OMG now I am scared to death!! That is so sad what are the grounds do you know off hand?

TIA I can google it so it's ok. No need to explain. Our justice system sure is a wreck if you ask me!!

AMOO

I found a case in New Orleans, where a verdict got over turned in a "juror" in a murder case was either sleeping during deliberatons or quoting the bible..which prompted the removal of the bible in the jury room...

http://celebrifi.com/gossip/Jury-del...te-616852.html

But having said all that..there were many cases in appellate courts that the bible did not change the verdict....I tend to think it isnt the bible being there that is the problem..it is how it is thumped by a juror which creates the issue...

I know there are many people who can quote the Bible, Chapter and Verse..no bible even needs to be there for that sort of thing really..However, the juror who refuses to deliberate is a huge problem!

Just a thought on that point..

LMS

[cog1]

Originally Posted by Lyndawitha"Y

I found a case in New Orleans, where a verdict got over turned in a "juror" in a murder case was either sleeping during deliberatons or quoting the bible..which prompted the removal of the bible in the jury room...

http://celebrifi.com/gossip/Jury-del...te-616852.html

But having said all that..there were many cases in appellate courts that the bible did not change the verdict....I tend to think it isnt the bible being there that is the problem..it is how it is thumped by a juror which creates the issue...

I know there are many people who can quote the Bible, Chapter and Verse..no bible even needs to be there for that sort of thing really..However, the juror who refuses to deliberate is a huge problem!

Just a thought on that point..

LMS

Yes, I agree with what you are saying here. From I'm reading it appears that if the bible is merely read and not used to come to actual verdict then hopefully we are okay.

I hope that made sense! LOL

AMOO

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Originally Posted by cog1

Yes, I agree with what you are saying here. From I'm reading it appears that if the bible is merely read and not used to come to actual verdict then hopefully we are okay.

I hope that made sense! LOL

AMOO

Yes, makes perfect sense..apparantly that Harlan case had the Death Sentence overturned to LWOP since...oh here..read it yourslef..but the verdict in the guilt phase was upheld...

http://www.coadp.org/thedeathrow/RobertHarlan.html

snippet~~

Although his conviction was affirmed on direct appeal, Kathleen Lord and Sharlene Reynolds of the Colorado State Public Defenders Office did an incredible job in having Judge Vigil of the Adams County District Court vacate the death sentence because of juror misconduct. Jurors in that case improperly brought Bibles into the jury room and wrote down and quoted passages from the Old Testament. Such reliance on outside sources is strictly forbidden and jurors are instructed are instructed accordingly

LMS

[cog1]

Originally Posted by Lyndawitha"Y

Yes, makes perfect sense..apparantly that Harlan case had the Death Sentence overturned to LWOP since...oh here..read it yourslef..but the verdict in the guilt phase was upheld...

http://www.coadp.org/thedeathrow/RobertHarlan.html

snippet~~

Although his conviction was affirmed on direct appeal, Kathleen Lord and Sharlene Reynolds of the Colorado State Public Defenders Office did an incredible job in having Judge Vigil of the Adams County District Court vacate the death sentence because of juror misconduct. Jurors in that case improperly brought Bibles into the jury room and wrote down and quoted passages from the Old Testament. Such reliance on outside sources is strictly forbidden and jurors are instructed are instructed accordingly

LMS

So, where the jurors in LD's case told not to bring a bible into the juror room?

This is why I have a problem with a juror posting about their deliberations. OF course had he told it to a reporter it would be on record so I guess either way it is okay.

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Originally Posted by cog1

So, where the jurors in LD's case told not to bring a bible into the juror room?

This is why I have a problem with a juror posting about their deliberations. OF course had he told it to a reporter it would be on record so I guess either way it is okay.

I just re-read that post..and to me it seems the their decision was based on each individual person being able to make the final decision as to Death..They had already done the deliberations balancing the mitigating versus aggravating factors and he said..Aggravating Factors were overwhelming. To decide someones death, even the most evil of persons has to be done by each one individually..as they have to live with their decision..

Having said all that tho..these jurors were all "Death Qualified"??..So it kinda makes me wonder just "How Qualified" were they?..It is nice to know at least, they reached their decision with reflection tho..they were NOT a Vindictive bunch of people..

LMS

[cog1]

Originally Posted by Lyndawitha"Y

I just re-read that post..and to me it seems the their decision was based on each individual person being able to make the final decision as to Death..They had already done the deliberations balancing the mitigating versus aggravating factors and he said..Aggravating Factors were overwhelming. To decide someones death, even the most evil of persons has to be done by each one individually..as they have to live with their decision..

Having said all that tho..these jurors were all "Death Qualified"??..So it kinda makes me wonder just "How Qualified" were they?..It is nice to know at least, they reached their decision with reflection tho..they were NOT a Vindictive bunch of people..

LMS

Okay, that makes more sense. Guess I should have re-read it myself. LOL It was a little confusing to me the way he worded it.

Thank you!

[luvmyboys]

Hello all, what's going on? did i miss anything?