The trial of Molly Martens

Yanked? What does yanked even mean? And maybe he felt as his wife she was dressed too revealingly and he wanted to address this..and you’re jumping on the domestic abuser:bully angle, as if to try absolve her (somewhat) of deliberately murdering him.

An absolute desperate and devious defence at trying to paint him as some bully/abuser, and you’re believing it

btw, don’t mean to come across as baiting, as you’re one poster here I’d respect.

Absolutely.. scheming tittle tattle nonsense and suddenly Mr. Corbett’s being labeled a bully/abuser..

It’s clutching at straws and pre mediated character assignation, nothing more.

It’s working on a few here…

While I either don’t believe some of this rubbish or it was obviously manufactured to look bad (such as the liberal use of speaker phone by Molly in public when having an argument with Jason)- nothing that’s been documented to date justifies murdering Jason in cold blood which is what happened. And especially not letting him die without calling for assistance- Molly wasn’t beaten to a pulp by her husband- she didn’t have any physical injuries prior to the murder - she could have walked away at any point but she didn’t because she wanted to get the kids - hence her badgering him throughout all of this to sign the legal papers - let’s hope the prosecution wake up and bring some sense of justice back into this so called hearing with a reminder of the key reasons why this was a successful murder trial previously -

Let’s hope the judge isn’t swayed so much

This is the real Molly Marten

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/jason-corbett-was-very-jealous-and-controlling-friends-of-molly-martens-tell-court/a903600772.html

The claim came as US prosecutors questioned a number of Ms Martens’ friends on whether they were aware of her history of telling outlandish lies including that she was the natural mother of the Irish widower's daughter, Sarah; that she had experienced birth complications; and that she had been begged by Mr Corbett's late first wife - who she never knew - to look after her children.

Prosecutors said that Ms Martens had also claimed to be a foster parent when she was not - and that she had been on the swim team of the prestigious US university, Clemson, when she had actually left college shortly after starting.

It was put to several of the witnesses that Ms Martens had even told her own bridesmaids at her wedding that she was Sarah's natural mother.

Molly Martins is bipolar. She left her ex to go to Ireland whilst they were engaged.

The narrative is completely controlled by her and her family now . Jason Corbett is been completely thrashed and to insinuate he killed his first wife is absolutely scandalous.

He was murdered and his killers are getting away with it. Her father knows how to play the system and has all the connections from work.

I hope the Martens can be sued after this .

What new evidence?

We are still waiting on it

There is no new evidence being presented just recycled claims from before.

Molly has pleaded “no contest” - apparently this means that if you were to sue Molly for wrongful death or whatever in a civil suit, you couldn’t assume the evidence in this trial and would have to essentially prove everything all over again - I believe there’s a potential downside too for pleading no contest where a civil trial is concerned but just not sure what it is - open to correction on the above but that’s the essence I got from a quick google a while back.

On another matter Does anyone know are the prosecution limited in what evidence they can submit to the judge.

So areas such as:

The wider circumstances of Jason’s first wife death and the presence of her sister before being taken to hospital

The obvious gap between Jason’s death and calling the paramedics and the fact that Jason’s body was cold by the time paramedics arrived ?

It seems to be one way traffic this week to a degree

Of course there is, it's the reason the original conviction was quashed and a new trial ordered which has subsequently been whittled down to a Class D Felony.

Supreme Court

Having concluded that the trial court erred by excluding Jack’s and Sarah’s statements, bystriking a portion of Tom’s testimony, and byadmitting certain expert witness testimony concerning alleged blood spatters on Tom’sand Molly’s clothing, we must determine whether defendants were prejudiced thereby. “To establish prejudice based on evidentiary rulings, defendant bears the burden of showing that a reasonable possibility exists that, absent the error, a different result would have been reached

If Jason was so controlling as you make out, why the fck was he planning to leave Molly?

That would be classic coercive control TBF. I'll take these kids who you love if you don't heal.

But there is no tangible evidence to suggest that he was going to leave her.

His sister testified in the first trial that she had a phone conversation with him in 2014 and he talked about wanting to move back before Jack started secondary, Jack was 9 at the time. She admitted on the stand there was no actual plans to.

It was the middle of the night apparently.

Of course it is, it is now admissible evidence which was deemed wrongly inadmissible in the first trial.

In a legal sense it is brand new evidence.

The tapes were played over 2 days last week.

Of course there is no jury as the prosecution offered a plea deal, but the sentencing Judge still has to rule on mitigation.

Jennifer Turner used to live across the road from the Corbetts. Her then husband was English and was very friendly with Mr Corbett, the two men sharing an interest in English Premier League football.

She left the area and moved to Georgia a year before Mr Corbett was killed.

She told the court that she could not recall being told by Martens Corbett that Mr Corbett had ever hit her.

But she did say she was aware that Mr Corbett got angry very quickly over small things, like not buying the right sort of fruit. Most of the women mentioned fruit in their testimonies.

She recalled an occasion when the two women went shopping to a mall, got back in their car and Marten Corbett’s phone was ringing.

There had been nine missed calls from Mr Corbett. He rang a further three times before she answered.

Ms Turner said even without speakerphone she could hear Mr Corbett shouting at his wife, demanding to know where she was, who she was with and how long she would be out.

Ms Turner said she had been in an abusive relationship herself and had urged Martens Corbett to leave the marriage, as "these things never get better".

Martens Corbett told her she could not leave because of the children.

Corroborates the children's interviews, where they stated at one stage there was 47 miss calls.

Not the only sketchy thing that was going on aparently.

Ms McCormack said she immediately heard Mr Corbett "screaming down the line. He called her a bitch, said she should never have left the children, and that she was going to pay for leaving."

Asked why she and her husband had recorded their statement to police on video, Ms McCormack said she had heard that some witness statements taken by police in the investigation had been inaccurate and she wanted to make sure that hers was accurate, so insisted the police made a video recording in the interview room in Lexington.

Boggles: so him possibly wanting out is you then making him out to be the baddy? So anyone who wants to leave, and “threatens” to leave a spouse (who they believe to be damaging-toxic) is displaying coercive control?

Whatever it is, you can be sure Martens is blowing it way out proportion with lies..and as I said, is every spouse who thinks of leaving displaying coercive control? Or is it possible they want out, and need out from their toxic partner?

you are continually wanting to use Martens’ fabrications as a way to paint Mr. Corbett as a bad person, and in doing do, understanding/justifying his murder.

Boggles, have you had any personal interaction with Jason Corbett or his family? You seem very determined to try to justify why he was beaten to death.

Just gotta be edgy. Like his previous niche defences of Markle.

Personally, do you think from what you read that the killing/murder was justified?

I read a lot of threads and occasionally throw in my 2c like most here, just find it unusual to see a thread where one poster replies to almost every single post