Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > The Troubled Teen Industry
New Skakel trial likely to call expert to testify about Elan
DannyB II:
--- Quote from: "Wayne Kernochan" ---
--- Quote ---Idiot Child Wrote:
Why would Tommy kill someone so brutally that he was sleeping with. He took her away from Mike, he had her that night....are you really this inept when it comes to this murder or are you on another one of your fishin expeditions. Looking to plagiarize again Wayne..poo.
--- End quote ---
You're a caveman, you know that? No wonder they didn't want you to testify. I can see you on the stand "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, why would Tommy kill her? She was putting out"
Sex had nothing to do with it. You couldn't possibly understand because you're sick, you don't experience emotions correctly. You see, the rest of us experience this thing called Love, and love can definitely cause people to kill like that.
Unlike you, we don't break people down to commodities. "I can fuck her, she's a keeper" We develop relationships based on love and passion
Maybe she broke up with him and wanted to be with Mike. Maybe she was conflicted and didn't want to have sex any more.
You also don't seem to comprehend the law. We don't convict even guilty people without evidence and we certainly don't take away their life because of tainted evidence. Anything they considered evidence that is attached to Elan is tainted. Elan tainted everything and everyone it touched.
Have a long life Dan
--- End quote ---
Jeesh.......what a beautifully scripted drama filled post. Wayne you are only one here to actually get sent away for molesting someone, so please spare us all the lesson on gender relations.
I will spell it out for you because as we can see you are more interested in making points here by insulting me with ridiculous accusations then sticking with the topic.
Tom didn't have an issue with Martha (that was ever brought out) that would bring about a psychotic episode like the one that killed Martha. Mike did have a psychotic episode that night, brought about by Martha's rejection and his brothers one upmanship, Tom knew Mike adored Martha and wanted to be with her and he took his brothers feeling and shoved them up Mike ass. So Mike went about to get his revenge and he picked the weaker of the two and also the one he felt really betrayed him the most.
Mike and Tom changed their stories concerning the timeline of there events that evening. I believe Tommy did this to help his brother but in the end it damn near implicated him.
Let me state also that this is my opinion, of course I have no facts, just what I experienced for a short period of time with Mike and what has been reported from the trial, witness accounts, books and magazine articles.
DannyB II:
--- Quote from: "psy" ---
--- Quote from: "Che Gookin" ---So what are the chances the old conviction gets overturned?
--- End quote ---
I'm not all that familiar with the case, but based on what I know, i'd say it's unlikely. Trying to convince your average Joe that he was somehow coerced into making a confession requires more than a short lecture by Richard Ofshe, as good as he is. People just don't understand coercive persuasion and most don't want to understand. Most want to believe free will is inviolable and anything that threatens that assumption is too dangerous to consider. Most will see him as troubled, having been put in a place for troubled kids because of that, and having gotten what he deserved. The concept that in order to graduate from many programs you not only have to confess to things, but also believe them is just too foreign.
--- End quote ---
Psy, if you were to read the newspaper and magazine articles and the books written about this case you will see that Elan or the program (can't remember right now) he went to before Elan, there is very little talk about them. This murder took place (1975) 3 years earlier then when he got to Elan and he wasn't convicted until (2002) 27 years later. Coleman and Higgins admissions were just a part of the overall base of damaging evidence compiled against Mike.
psy:
Danny. You might want to read the most recent page of the rules thread. Rules have changed. You can't start (or finish) fights anymore. Discuss the case without attacking others (even if they attack, you, leave that to me) or take your disagreements to Open Free for All. Wayne already knows the rules have changed and calling somebody a "Moron" is unacceptable outside the Offa, though his post was made prior to the rules change. I've moved your most recent post to the Offa as a result.
Learn to say "I disagree, and here's why..." Attaching insults, insinuations, and accusations are unnecessary.
none-ya.:
The only thing relevant to Michael Skakel getting a new trial is whether or not Mickey Sherman was inadequate in his defense. That may very likely happen because there has to be some compelling evidence for them to have gotten this trial in the first place. I would say his chances are 50/50 based on that. A judge who heard the evidence agrees
DannyB II:
--- Quote from: "psy" ---Danny. You might want to read the most recent page of the rules thread. Rules have changed. You can't start (or finish) fights anymore. Discuss the case without attacking others (even if they attack, you, leave that to me) or take your disagreements to Open Free for All. Wayne already knows the rules have changed and calling somebody a "Moron" is unacceptable outside the Offa, though his post was made prior to the rules change. I've moved your most recent post to the Offa as a result.
Learn to say "I disagree, and here's why..." Attaching insults, insinuations, and accusations are unnecessary.
--- End quote ---
Okie Dokie!!!!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version