The trial of Molly Martens

njs030

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

What are you taking about? Where is this coming from?

We can't listen to him because he was beaten to death.

It's from the defence's closing argument. I was replying to the post from iguana that was quoted within my post.

AudreyHepburn

kbannon wrote: »

Deliberating tonight until 10pm Irish time.


Is the option there to find one guilty but not the other?

If there is I still believe that Daddy Martens is going to be the one to take the fall - I have an awful feeling Molly will go free.

I think the last time I felt this strongly that an accused was guilty was the Graham Dwyer trial and like him I think these two both deserve to go down.

Seth Brundle

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

If there is I still believe that Daddy Martens is going to be the one to take the fall - I have an awful feeling Molly will go free.

I think as the jury requested her statement last night, they are doubting her view of events. I can see her going down also.

AudreyHepburn

kbannon wrote: »

I think as the jury requested her statement last night, they are doubting her view of events. I can see her going down also.

I must have missed that! Here's hoping you're right.

There's no way she wasn't involved as far as I'm concerned.

Maldesu

kbannon wrote: »

I think as the jury requested her statement last night, they are doubting her view of events. I can see her going down also.

I don't think they got it though cos it hadn't been submitted into evidence

smurgen

Closing prosecution statement looked strong also.

lazybones32

Please God, the jury will be unanimous.

retro:electro

For me this case is clear cut. They are both guilty of murder in the second degree for me. The ferocity with which they killed him is not manslaughter. If it was manslaughter there would be no delayed 911 call and would have tried CPR.
I've no doubt they intended to kill him.
They should actually, rightfully, have been charged with murder in the first, because after reading through some of what happened I'm not entirely convinced this wasn't premeditated. But they certainly would have gotten off this charge as it's too hard to prove.

Paddy Cow

iguana wrote: »

Well if that's not a sign that it's time for me to stop internetting and go to sleep nothing is.:o

It's not your fault. It's a good example of where one comma would save a lot of confusion

Vague

"We know he (Mr Corbett) has had depression issues, we know he had sleep issues - we know that three weeks before he had his hands around Molly's throat he had anger issues. Don't listen to me - listen to him (Mr Corbett). From his own mouth.

Clear

"We know he (Mr Corbett) has had depression issues, we know he had sleep issues - we know that three weeks before he had his hands around Molly's throat, he had anger issues. Don't listen to me - listen to him (Mr Corbett). From his own mouth.

njs030

Paddy Cow wrote: »

It's not your fault. It's a good example of where one comma would save a lot of confusion

Vague


Clear

You're right it was bad journalism and hard to read, it probably made perfect sense in court.

beertons

What's the difference between murder in the second and murder?

ohnonotgmail

beertons wrote: »

What's the difference between murder in the second and murder?

Planning. Or the lack of it.

Gadgetman496

I guess murder is premeditated, murder in the 2nd means you meant to kill but it was on the spur of the moment so not premeditated.

Manslaughter is where you kill but it was neither premeditated or meant\intended.

Riskymove

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

I guess murder is premeditated, murder in the 2nd means you meant to kill but it was on the spur of the moment so not premeditated.

Manslaughter is where you kill but it was neither premeditated or meant\intended.

in NC the distinction for manslaughter is a "lack of malice"

Deise Vu

Riskymove wrote: »

in NC the distinction for manslaughter is a "lack of malice"

Just picture the scene where Thomas Martens smashes his son-in-law's skull into pieces with a steel baseball bat hitting him at least 12 times, including the blows when his son-in-law was already lying dead on the bedroom floor. This assault is interspersed with his daughter dropping a brick on him several times also.

Then he presumably steps back and says "no offence intended."

The awful thing about it is that it only needs one or two members of the jury, who can't get their heads around the idea that 'respectable' people would do something as heinous as this, to get the Martens acquitted. If the Martens were of African or Hispanic origin the case would have been over two weeks ago.

seamus

beertons wrote: »

What's the difference between murder in the second and murder?

Murder with intent versus murder in the heat of the moment.

In Irish law this is murder -v- voluntary manslaughter. Loosely - the requirements to prove the charges would differ between Irish and US law.

For Forks Sake

Deise Vu wrote: »

If the Martens were of African or Hispanic origin the case would have been over two weeks ago.

Cops probably would've shot them on arrival at the scene

Deise Vu

Deise Vu wrote: »

Just picture the scene where Thomas Martens smashes his son-in-law's skull into pieces with a steel baseball bat hitting him at least 12 times, including the blows when his son-in-law was already lying dead on the bedroom floor. This assault is interspersed with his daughter dropping a brick on him several times also.

Then he presumably steps back and says "no offence intended."

The awful thing about it is that it only needs one or two members of the jury, who can't get their heads around the idea that 'respectable' people would do something as heinous as this, to get the Martens acquitted. If the Martens were of African or Hispanic origin the case would have been over two weeks ago.

I'm guessing "malice" is shorthand for "malice aforethought" as opposed to the regular use of the term...

I presume African Americans and Hispanics are perfectly entitled to raise a claim of self defence, and it would be examined in the normal way. In fact perhaps the most infamous verdict in US criminal legal history involved an African American, who was acquitted. Not sure I follow the point.

Pipmae

There is a verdict in.

https://twitter.com/AlexRoseNews/with_replies

January

BOTH GUILTY!!!

RacoonQueen

Molly guilty. Hurrah.

edit: both guilty, even better. Now let those two kids grow up surrounded by love with good memories of their dad.

Pipmae

Thomas and Molly Martens both guilty of second degree murder.

https://twitter.com/AlexRoseNews/with_replies

Deise Vu

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm guessing "malice" is shorthand for "malice aforethought" as opposed to the regular use of the term...

I presume African Americans and Hispanics are perfectly entitled to raise a claim of self defence, and it would be examined in the normal way. In fact perhaps the most infamous verdict in US criminal legal history involved an African American, who was acquitted. Not sure I follow the point.

OJ was able to hire the best (most unscrupulous?) lawyers money could buy. Not an option for most people. The point I am making was even made by the Marten's defence (in a roundabout way) when they lauded his FBI background and described him as a hero. They almost implied that a guilty verdict would be unpatriotic. They were basically saying 'why would such a respectable person commit such a heinous crime'. Call me innocent but I don't think they would have said the same thing about a Hispanic gardener.

At the risk of derailing the thread, you could call it the Oscar Pistoriuos defence. "How stupid or enraged would he have to be to commit murder in this way, therefore it mustn't have been murder". Plenty of people bought that line in Oscar's case too.

Edit: Just seen the verdict. There are actually sensible jurors somewhere in the world!

Gatling

Could be bogey , jury asked for a short break after a stressful decision

Gatling

Breaking
Both found Guilty of second degree murder

Missix

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm guessing "malice" is shorthand for "malice aforethought" as opposed to the regular use of the term...

I presume African Americans and Hispanics are perfectly entitled to raise a claim of self defence, and it would be examined in the normal way. In fact perhaps the most infamous verdict in US criminal legal history involved an African American, who was acquitted. Not sure I follow the point.

Of course they are entitled to claim self defence...but do you honestly,hand on heart,believe that they get equal justice in America??

seamus

Great news for the Corbett family. Hopefully they can now move on knowing that some justice has been done for the murder of Jason.

I'm glad the jury have apparently seen through the lies and malice of the Martens.

Missix

Gatling wrote: »

Breaking
Both found Guilty of second degree murder

Thank God!!

MarcusP12

Wow, I'm pleasantly surprised by that....didn't think they'd both go down for it...hopefully the family can now find some peace....justice has been done thank God....

jimmycrackcorm

I should but can't actually believe it. Justice served without a doubt.