Busy afternoon
It has been a very busy 90 minutes. Let me break down each witnesses' testimony and the highlights of it.
1. Steve Killian testified he saw Emily Anderson at Holiday To Go on the morning of Dec. 29, 2005. He had to get milk for the grand kids and cigarettes for himself. He said he saw Emily Anderson in her truck parked outside the Holiday To Go. He raised his milk when he saw Emily's Got Milk? sign on the front of her truck. Yeah, I got my milk, Killian told the jurors he thought when he saw that sign. He raised the gallon. She grinned; he grinned. The crowd and jurors laughed when he shared that story. Once back in his vehicle, Killian testified he saw a man get into Emily's truck. The man was about 6 feet tall, with shoulder length hair. He described it like Billy Ray Cyrus hair during Achy Breaky Heart. A mullet? Now a days? Anyway, during cross examination, Bellas asked the date Killian said he saw Emily. Originally, when Killian called law enforcement, he said he couldn't remember the date, it was maybe Wednesday or Thursday - Emily went missing on Thursday. But Killian now swears it was Thursday, Dec. 29. Dubs later asked if law enforcement ever talked to him again after Killian's first initial call. He said no.
The next witness was Tony Ramsey, a Sawmills resident and former neighbor of Jerry. He testified he was outside working on his lawn mower when Jerry drove by shortly after 10 a.m. Dec. 29, 2005. Ramsey knew it was the 29th because of a receipt from the mower place. On the 30th, the lawn mower had to be taken for repairs, and Ramsey knew he was trying to fix the lawn mower the day before. Ramsey said Jerry was driving away from the Anderson's house when Jerry stopped and said, "I guess Santa Claus didn't bring you a new mower and you have to fix the other one." During cross examination, Bellas asked about the date he saw Jerry. Ramsey reportedly told investigators he couldn't remember what date he was fixing his mower and saw Jerry. But he said he had a receipt that would prove the date. However, no one ever called back to get that receipt. Nor did Ramsey offer to show law enforcement that evidence. Campbell asked after cross-examination, if Ramsey works with the sheriff's office? He said no, he just helps pay their salaries. That also got a laugh from the crowd and jurors.
The next two witnesses were Betty Dillard and Tammy Beltcher. Both worked at the Quality Inn in Dec. and Jan. 2005 and 2006. Dillard still works there. Both ladies said they saw Emily's truck parked there Saturday after the Thursday Emily went missing. Both said on Tuesday after Emily went missing, so Jan. 3, they saw Emily get out of a beige or brown jeep. They never saw Emily again. They both identified photos that it was Emily. During cross examination, Bellas asked if they saw any other photos from the defense other than Emily Anderson. Both ladies were only shown one photo. However, law enforcement never showed the ladies any photos.
I gotta run. Be back shortly.
1. Steve Killian testified he saw Emily Anderson at Holiday To Go on the morning of Dec. 29, 2005. He had to get milk for the grand kids and cigarettes for himself. He said he saw Emily Anderson in her truck parked outside the Holiday To Go. He raised his milk when he saw Emily's Got Milk? sign on the front of her truck. Yeah, I got my milk, Killian told the jurors he thought when he saw that sign. He raised the gallon. She grinned; he grinned. The crowd and jurors laughed when he shared that story. Once back in his vehicle, Killian testified he saw a man get into Emily's truck. The man was about 6 feet tall, with shoulder length hair. He described it like Billy Ray Cyrus hair during Achy Breaky Heart. A mullet? Now a days? Anyway, during cross examination, Bellas asked the date Killian said he saw Emily. Originally, when Killian called law enforcement, he said he couldn't remember the date, it was maybe Wednesday or Thursday - Emily went missing on Thursday. But Killian now swears it was Thursday, Dec. 29. Dubs later asked if law enforcement ever talked to him again after Killian's first initial call. He said no.
The next witness was Tony Ramsey, a Sawmills resident and former neighbor of Jerry. He testified he was outside working on his lawn mower when Jerry drove by shortly after 10 a.m. Dec. 29, 2005. Ramsey knew it was the 29th because of a receipt from the mower place. On the 30th, the lawn mower had to be taken for repairs, and Ramsey knew he was trying to fix the lawn mower the day before. Ramsey said Jerry was driving away from the Anderson's house when Jerry stopped and said, "I guess Santa Claus didn't bring you a new mower and you have to fix the other one." During cross examination, Bellas asked about the date he saw Jerry. Ramsey reportedly told investigators he couldn't remember what date he was fixing his mower and saw Jerry. But he said he had a receipt that would prove the date. However, no one ever called back to get that receipt. Nor did Ramsey offer to show law enforcement that evidence. Campbell asked after cross-examination, if Ramsey works with the sheriff's office? He said no, he just helps pay their salaries. That also got a laugh from the crowd and jurors.
The next two witnesses were Betty Dillard and Tammy Beltcher. Both worked at the Quality Inn in Dec. and Jan. 2005 and 2006. Dillard still works there. Both ladies said they saw Emily's truck parked there Saturday after the Thursday Emily went missing. Both said on Tuesday after Emily went missing, so Jan. 3, they saw Emily get out of a beige or brown jeep. They never saw Emily again. They both identified photos that it was Emily. During cross examination, Bellas asked if they saw any other photos from the defense other than Emily Anderson. Both ladies were only shown one photo. However, law enforcement never showed the ladies any photos.
I gotta run. Be back shortly.
posted by THE HICKORY DAILY RECORD at at
3:29 PM
27 Comments:
OK, now the brown van is a beige or brown jeep?
What is wrong with these people?
Sometimes the ladies don't always describe vehicles like gentlemen do. That's why the van/jeep doesn't bother me so much. I myself have been know to call beige brown.
What does catch my attention most is that there were 2 employees who recognized Emily and saw her get into a brown/beige van/jeep. If it were one person, I think we might be able to say she had it wrong. But 2? What bothers me is that law enforcement didn't follow up with these two women. It's like they wanted a conviction no matter what. Damn the exculpatory evidence..just pursue anything that possibly makes Jerry look guilty.
Justwatchin, the testimony was she got out, not into a brown jeep.
Are you, as was suggested yesterday, the same person who posted on the topix forum?
No.. that's not me. I wasn't on that blog back then. Didn't realize someone already had that name. I did go back an read some of the earlier posts though. No wonder you guys hate me.
:)
Sorry.. out of the van/jeep.
The tool box might have trapped moisture but with out air you cannot make rust appear, I think the Dr. was misquoted.
My two cents and this may surprise you, in my head I discount the first two male witnesses. Their stories evolved. I'll bet they are well meaning good people, but if you can't remember one day but can remember later on... well it raises a red flag for me. I'm not saying they are dishonest. It's just if I were on the jury and a murderer might go free on that testimony, I wouldn't consider it and look at other evidence to decide Mr. Anderson's fate.
To be fair, this is the same reason why I didn't consider the Mexican workers' testimony to be valid. Their stories also evolved over time.
Now the two women working at the hotel. Their story never changed. Them I would believe.
WHO RENTED THAT HOTEL ROOM!
And another thing. Now I’m no rocket scientist, but if the workers saw the truck parked at the hotel on Saturday Dec 31st. And they saw Emily getting out of a vehicle on Tuesday Jan 3rd. Wouldn’t it make sense to check the hotel registration book to see which guest were there for those days.
If I remember rightly, that hotel has about 100 rooms. I could see people checking in for New Years Eve. But how many people would still be there on the following Tuesday. Holiday was over by then. People had to get back to work.
So there would only be maybe a handful of guest who were there for all those days. Who are they? Check with the Department of Motor Vehicles. Does anyone have a brown vehicle? Does anyone come from Texas? Does anyone come from Sawmills area?
It is not too late to solve this crime.
I use my debit card most of the time. I can check my bank online to see exactly when and where I used the card. Maybe the males used their debit cards, but they guessed at which day they saw Emily.. then they went back and checked with their banks... and came up with the exact day. Law Enforcement sure didn't check in with them again. Also.. I tend to believe the guy who said he saw Emily at the convenience store. Who makes up "Got Milk?".
Justwatchin....I agree...Who makes that kind of statement up????...The keystone Cops never followed up on nothing...No notes on anything....No nothing..Just "good ole Boy' B/S...I "got Milk"....Too funny...I am sure the jurors want to go home and forget this whole "fiasco"...Thats why you hear of laughter in a courtroom...This whole trial has been a joke...If I was seated there I would laugh too...
I have just invoked my first amendment rights again....Thanks
craig, why do you keep repeating your amendment rights? you sound like one more "smart axx", why don't you and allison take these peanuts and go away.You and her have over taken this site and we have heard enough from you two. You both sound like trailer park trash to me.That ia my "amendment rights"
sorry about the spelling in my previous post, my hand cramped up.
Sickster.. do you have a point in that rant? Maybe that cramp was in your brain. Craig and Allison make this blog interesting. They are both critical thinkers with original ideas. So Craig puts a disclaimer on his posts.. who does that hurt??
Did the CCSD check into Jerry's whereabouts during the entire time from Dec 29 until the truck was found with her body?
Think about this. What if she was at the motel with someone else? Maybe someway Jerry found out about this other man and learned they were at the motel. Could he (Jerry) have flattened the tire that the ladies at the motel saw so that he could find out who if anyone would help Emily fix the tire. Then he killed Emily after the truck was moved to the Waffle House and put her body in the tool box. Perhaps he held the man at gunpoint and then after the murder sent him on his way. The man returns to TX and then calls back to report the truck to the Waffle House people (or however that part of the story went).
Sick&tired.....After proudly serving in the 1st Battalion 110th Infantry I have earned that right...You through my service have earned that right...You're Welcome...
You are correct in assuming I am a smart ass....I have a very good education..You however are "biased" in assuming anyone that lives in a trailer is trash...My brick home suits my needs well,you should come over for a coffee sometime...Thank you for the peanuts I will eat them when this circus continues on Monday...Have a nice weekend....Keep away from those wicked trailer people.....Thanks
Loopy.. it is my understanding that Jerry's whereabouts can be accounted for during the period that Emily was missing. I believe even the prosecutors agree that he could not have murdered Emily during that time.
I also think it's interesting that the states most damning witness was Emily's friend who said Jerry threatened to kill Emily. What's funny is that Jerry threatened to kill her during the time that the prosecution is saying she was already dead. A man who threatens to kill his wife is pissed because he thinks she left him.. not because he's already killed her.
Allison,
Do you really expect a person, Latino or otherwise, to command credibility when he testifies, under oath, that his name is Antonio Reyes when in fact his name is really something entirely different? There were outstanding warrants for the "real" person so he just made up a new identity and kept going. I believe from the jury's reaction to the news that Antonio was really Jose - well, let's just say they were astounded. Doubtful they will give any credibility to his testimony and rightfully so.
It was introduced in court that Antonio Reyes was employed by Jerry and Emily at the farm for almost 7 years. Apparently they trusted him to work with them on their farm and in their business, no matter what his name is/was. Court testimony also indicated Jerry changed his story regarding his location and activities on December 29th multiple times. If you tell the truth the first time, there is only one "story" to tell. Jerry has his own credibility issues.
tos - and how are you related to this case? Jerry has not and will not testify. The burden of proof is on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jerry committed the crime with which he is charged. Jerry has no burden to prove that he is not guilty or innocent. Everything that you have heard about what Jerry may have said came out of someone's mouth other than Jerry's. It's called heresay and it is considered less reliable than 1st hand information offered by a witness who has sworn on a Bible to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.... First thing Antonio/Jose was asked, state your full name??????? Guess what - he lied on the first question asked and it went down hill from there.
So even if Emily was discovered by Jerry to be at a motel room with someone other man, and kill Emily, why didn'e he go ahead and also kill this supposed lover??? Why would he let the lover go knowing good and well this man could tell on him! And how if Jerry did kill Emily at this motel, then why didn't anyone hear gunshots and see him removing her body and stuffing her in her own tool box??? And where is all the stuff that was in her tool box, like all the tools and stuff like that????
That right there tells me that this had to be premeditated onm somebodies behalf, who ever it was that killed her. This place where the truck was found, was a 24 hour place, somebody had to seem something, it isn't every day that somebody stuffs somebody into a tool box in a 24 hour parking lot with no supposed witnesses!!!
All this just doesn't add up with what the defense is trying to protray as what supposedly happened. The evidence still points to the farm!!!
And the fact about the gun, it could be any where between Sawmills and where the truck was found! Who ever did all this and moved the truck, could have drove n=miles in between the finl stop at the waffle house!!!
There are to many better explanations than to think that there was some so called lover, kidnapper or what ever it may be to try and set this man free!!!!!
Stafford was allowed to testify IN COURT about Jerry's statements without objection of hearsay by the defense. Jerry even wrote down the first "version" of his story and that was introduced as evidence. Jerry's other stories came from the multiple phone calls he made to Stafford -- these were also introduced as evidence without objection.
Also consider....
Two witnessess testified to hearing gunshots coming from the farm on the morning of December 29th.
Emily used her cell phone daily to make calls. She did not use her cell phone at all after December 29th. The dirty damaged cell phone was discovered on her when her body was found. If someone held her hostage would she be allowed to carry a cell phone? However if she was dead, it wouldn't matter whether she had the cell phone or not.
Emily was discovered in the tool box FACE DOWN, with grass and dirt on her boots, HANDS, and FACE. Grass and dirt were in the tool box. There were paint chips from the bucket of the John Deere front end loader were on the BACK of her sweat shirt. The dirty damaged cellphone was attached to her clothes at the waist. Would Emily go on a shopping trip or to a motel room to meet someone in this filthy dirty state? ....and would she stay that way for days??? Maybe she wouldn't clean off her boots, but I would think she would wash her hands and face. It doesn't sound like there was an option to "wash up" between the time she followed Jerry down to the field and when her body was discovered in the toolbox.
Sounds like someone shot her, scooped up her body in the bucket of a John Deere frontend loader from a grass/dirt covered ground, and dumped her face down into the toolbox.
There was testimony that the truck was first seen in the parking lot on the 12/31; the tire slashed with a knife. If the Quality Inn employees saw Emily the following Tuesday, how did filthy Emily with dirt and bruises on her face, dirt/grass on her hands and boots from the farm, get out of the beige/brown jeep/van and get into that toolbox.
The truck's tire was slashed and there was an anonymous phone call to the Waffle House about the missing person's truck in the parking lot. I agree, the caller must be involved with the crime, otherwise why not just call the police and tell them, instead of calling the Waffle House? Obiviously, the murderer wanted Emily's body to be found. Usually, when the murderer wants the victim to be found, there is a close association between the murderer and the victim. The murderer wants "closure" and/or there is life insurance money that can not be released to the beneficiary until a body is recovered and the victim is proven to be dead. Isn't Jerry the beneficiary of over a million dollars in this case? Also, Jerry "testified" through Stafford, he wanted to give away Emily's clothes and destroy her pictures. He said this only a couple of weeks after her body was found.
Neither the medical examiner or the forensic anthropologist testified with certainty what the temperature was during the time that Emily was missing. Nor did either expert do any scientific study or testify about decomposition of Emily's body based on the conditions of the body storage in this particular case. The anthropologist did not even examine the body. His testimony was based on looking at pictures! What kind of "expert" bases his/her testimony of body decomposition based on looking at photographs? Emily's body was outdoors in the winter cold for a week and therefore would not decompose as rapidly as it would if stored in a warm environment.
Furthermore....
No one testified that the glasses in the hotel room were Emily's. All that was said was "Women's glasses were found in a hotel room"
No one testified that the "Texas calls" to the Waffle Inn were actually from THE person who said the truck was in the parking lot. The person who called with that information could have called from a local phone. Also,my neighbor works as a sales person for a company located in Texas. She was given a company phone. When she calls me using that phone, it appears the phone call is from Texas, but she's actually calling from her home in Lenoir.
No one testified that Emily purchased anything with a Victoria Secret credit card. The credit report indicated she had a Victoria Secret credit card. A credit report can indicate when you got the card and when the last purchase was. That information must not be relevant in this case, otherwise I would think the defense would have mentioned those facts as well. You know you CAN buy a GIFT for someone at Victoria Secret (and if you apply for a credit card at the same time get 10% off your purchase.)
Based on what I've read here and elsewhere in multiple newspapers, I think there is evidence to indicate that Jerry is involved in Emily's murder. However, I've not been in the court room to hear and see the evidence first hand, so my opinions are not based on the facts from court transcripts, but based on hearsay from reporters, like Jennifer and others, who tend to summarize the testimony rather than state the facts.
OK! First the glasses were NOT found in the hotel room. They were in the parking lot. 2. The two women that ID Emily from a photo and stated she had BLOND hair, just didn't know the facts. At the time Emily went missing she had DARK BROWN hair and when they found her she had DARK BROWN hair. Just too much has been posted that isn't facts and perhaps posted by someone with a theory about the murder. Or what they read in the newspaper. Well, if you weren't at the trial, then it is easy to believe some of the things that have been written here. I was there and you can not imagine how much damming evidence was not allowed to be heard by the jury. I have no idea who pulled the trigger, but everything I heard at the trial sure points in one direction. Even after all the mistakes the police made during the investigation.
Some of the things posted as fact on this blog, it makes you wonder, when I stated I thought the Dr. for UT was misquoted, low and behold if there wasn't a reply.
Just now, I have ck'd the site, it is for a cabinet to store wood working equipment, had nothing to do with a truck toolbox.
Another blogger posted there was a love letter for Bill, I think the testimony was it was a card from a floral arrangement, how things change with the telling.
I don't think much of the people's testimony to seeing her, I remembered them saying the lady had blond hair and got something out of the truck and that there was a man with her ,when interviewed by WCNC.
tos, no offense, but I think you summed it up in your statement:
"...so my opinions are not based on the facts"
So much of what you stated in yourt post does not reflect what happened at the trial. You are confusing rumor with fact.
Allison, I think tos made some interesing points.
I don't think anyone can be certain of what goes on in the court room unless they are there, by the dates on your post it isn't possible for you to be in the courtroom.
Therefore we who are blogging are just using hearsay and rumor if we say something did happen.
I think it would be wise to state it is just our thoughts, not fact.
Think of the glasses, not found in a motel room but in the parking lot, the card, first a card from a floral arrangment evolved into a love letter, it seem we who are home cannot keep the evidence straight. We have no facts of our own, just what we have read, heard or seen on TV. These are someone elses take on the testimony.
Allison, no offense, but if you are going to quote me, please quote the statement in it's entirety. I said:
"Based on what I've read here and elsewhere in multiple newspapers, I think there is evidence to indicate that Jerry is involved in Emily's murder. However, I've not been in the court room to hear and see the evidence first hand, so my opinions are not based on the facts from court transcripts, but based on hearsay from reporters, like Jennifer and others, who tend to summarize the testimony rather than state the facts."
People base OPINIONS from what they hear and read, whether it is fact or fiction. I made an effort in my statement (above) to let the reader know how I arrived at my point of view, rather than try to mislead anyone into thinking that I know all the facts.
Allison, I take it from your response that you have been attending the trial since it's inception and know all the facts. So, by all means, take this opportunity to clear up the confusion.
OK, I’ll give you and example. You said:
“the tire slashed with a knife”
There was no testimony saying the tire was slashed with a knife. In fact, the testimony was:
“He [Greene] said the tire was punctured not by a bullet or knife. It was some kind of irregular object, he said. It had a jagged cut”
So you are not basing your decisions on the given facts. There are other examples in your post but I don’t think it is worth deconstructing.
tos i read that jerry had his help look for a phone he said he lost did they find it ? did they find it an gave it back to him. would it not have been dirty. and what happend to the dark van that was said to be found on farm.things the paper printed ant half been told .
Post a Comment
<< Home