Quote:
Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom  Given what he had, I thought Nurmi did a very decent job....remember, his hands were pretty tied and he had very few options. He actually did bring up some decent points in terms of poking holes in the state's case and creating some talking points for the jury. He doesn't have a lot of personality or 'oompf', which was needed -- but I think he did a helluva job given his circumstances and given he didn't even want to be on this case. Poor guy, how *awful* it's gotta be to freakin' defend someone you can't stand and, more importantly, probably don't believe one bit. Can you imagine???
I think the verdict will be 2nd degree or a hung jury. But, eh, who knows??? Gawd I'd love to be a fly on the wall in that jury room! |
Ann, girl, you got me puzzled? Huh? I know it's late and I'm functioning only at amoebic-level thinking lately but:
What holes did Numbing Nurmi poke and what points that there aren't equally damning, sound facts in such a cumulative collection as to totally refute them and in fact, infer the opposite so strongly that they become corroborative? The State's case is stronger than most any murder case of circumstantial evidence and all of that circumstantial evidence of premeditation and personal instability points to a lifetime lier who has borderline personality disorder with witnessed evidence of stalking behavior who coincidentally did a whole series of highly suspicious things within 48 hours either side of the murder that she cannot explain or even offer circumstantial proof of that sufficiently overrides contravening circumstantial evidence. And why in the world does she only remember things that tend to help her case and "forget" the rest? Of just say, "I can't explain that"!
All that we have as her reason for her snapping and killing in "self defense" is that a proven lifetime lier
says the man attacked her and domestically abused her, though she kept coming back, even when he told her not to, knowing she had the power to lure him back in with her sexuality and adoration, though he was tired of it all and wanted out. But despite still being drawn in by her sexually when she's standing on his doorstep, I think while she was snapping pictures of him, preparing to kill him and have those photos to "enjoy" afterward, she was probably one last time sensually and flirtatiously verbally trying to him to marry her and/or take her to Cancun. Then when he said "no, that's it, Jodi, you are not going and furthermore, I'm not marrying you - we're done", she laid his camera aside, ran out of the bathroom pretending to bawl, got her knife and gun and back she came, murder in her heart. She would have the last word. Are there things we can't answer? Yes, in every unwitnessed murder there are always things we can't know and wonder why the killer forget to do this or didn't do that. But that's how even the smartest killer can get caught - having human moments and forgetting things.
She wasn't injured herself or bruised and apparently not even a hangnail after the fight for life and there is that mountain of circumstantial evidence of all of the things that she did to prepare for and cover her crime and lie, lie, lie as usual about it all. What makes anybody think this is the
one time in her life she's telling the truth when there is not one piece of circumstantial or other evidence to back her up? No nude photos of little boys on the computer and no injuries to her and no hospital visits or no one saw her with bruises or a black eye, broken bones, missing tooth or anything any time ever. And a man lies dead, all his dignity stolen and his sexual peccadilloes carefully recorded and kept to share with the world as it clucks its tongue in distaste about him while reading the
50 Shades of Grey trilogy.
And I agree with you - I think there will be people on that jury that vote against first degree murder or vote first degree with life/30 years, etc., and they'll give the same reasons people like that always give - they had questions. Some people have to have the murder on video or see something with their own two eyes before they can trust their own deductive or reasoning powers. They are too unsure of their own abilities to make substantial decisions, such as voting a verdict with a long, long sentence or the death penalty. Ah well. If she does get off with 2nd degree or manslaughter and gets out of prison fairly quickly, she'll have to live a Casey Anthony type existence and that won't be any fun.