I’m not sure. It does remind me of YD who came right out and said she got enjoyment from arguing, it didn’t matter the topic. Maybe these 2 are of the same thought process?
Hum. You’re right. RG did leave a witness alive didn’t he? That could be problematic for the civil trial. Self defense, “as violent as it takes”, would be/could be justified.
You make some good points HH. I knew I liked you for some reason.
Alarming inconsistencies in their testimony which has been commented on by many people covering the trial, etc. The jury didn’t find RG or LK at all credible regarding the alleged 3rd shot and all charges regarding RG. I do not think a 3rd shot was ever fired. I think it was a fabricated lie. Evidentially the jury was also not impressed by testimony either. I believe LK thought she was being clever and attempted to outsmart the defense attorney questioning her and her approach backfired tremendously. She looked incredibly dishonest and unauthentic.
I really do not understand people that think they can outsmart the truth. You get up on a witness stand and it is basically impossible to keep a large network of lies straight when questioned by any decent lawyer. Same for questioning by police. Keeps me honest.
I just want to add that I had just finished being a juror on a 4 week federal trial just before this trial started. I can say that every juror picked up different things from the testimony and every one brought something important to the discussion during deliberations, including questioning some of the witness testimony.
In the case I was involved in the prosecution had done a VERY through job collecting evidence and the witnesses testimony was backed up by clear evidence when ever it was relevant. Because of this a heroin dealer was convicted on 11 out of 12 counts.
In this case the lack of evidence was a glaring hole and combined with the impeached witness testimony I can imagine there was a LOT of discussion in the jury room and I agree with others that the NGRI was a compromise with a couple of hold out jurors.
Everyone, please stop responding to and arguing with posters who insist on rehashing facts and inventing new “facts” from the criminal trial. Use the ignore function!
This is my sentiments EXACTLY. Thank you for the laugh.
I was actually at Champs a couple weeks ago and my mom was being groom, I said at all cost protect the ribbons, I can carry/move/whatever else just get the ribbons to safety (it was pouring rain). She laughs and says she knows she knows, turns around drops the ribbon in the mud
She did NOT understand the assignment. Was hilarious though. We laughed forever.
Really? Omg! That’s what I’ve been after all this time. It’s been 3 damn years! Thank you Fearless EIM Leader. I shall wear it in my basement (and Walmart) proudly. I love me some pink!
And as you know full well, 48 Hours has no way of knowing that for a fact and neither does anyone else.
It’s one of the things the civil jury will have to consider. Given the evidence presented to them, will they believe MB removed the gun from the safe and drove with it to the farmhouse? And then regardless of whether they believe the gun was already there or MB brought it, the jury will have to decide whether there is enough evidence to conclude that MB pulled the trigger and shot LK. Much to consider.