A busy morning
What a busy and interesting morning. First thing this morning, Dubs said she expects to be done with evidence presentation either today or tomorrow... Ohhh, that means we could hear a verdict this week. It'll just depend if the prosecution has any more presentation (I think they get another opportunity, maybe someone can answer that), the length of the closing statements and the deliberation. I wonder how long it will take the jurors to decide.
So, this morning we've heard from four witnesses. Bill Ramsey was the first on the stand, briefly. He simply talked about Emily's miniature horses and the search the night she went missing. In his opinion, Jerry was concerned Dec. 29, 2005. Sandra Smith was Jerry and Emily's hair dresser. She got a laugh out of the jurors, crowd and even Jerry. She told of a story when Jerry and his son Matt came to get their hair cut. Matt asked her about color hair gel and wanted her to put some in his dad's hair. Jerry agreed. He walked out of the salon with either blue or green, she said, spiked hair - well as much as Smith could spike it. Jerry it bald on top, with reddish hair around the sides and back of his head. Smith also testified she did Emily's hair on Dec. 28, 2005. She touched up her roots, Smith said. Emily had pretty blonde hair. Smith also did her hair for the funeral. Smith said Emily's hair was darker than when she did it on the 28th. What does that mean? Did Emily die her hair darker or did it have something to do with her trapped in a toolbox? Bellas did not cross-examination on either of these witnesses. He asked the next witnesses just two questions on cross-examination. Teresa Hart, a former manager at PD Grocery on Sawmills School Road, saw Emily almost every morning, including Dec. 29, 2005. That was an odd morning, Hart said, because Emily was all dressed up. She was in khaki pants, a tucked in shirt, a belt and brown loafers. Usually, Hart said, Emily would be in work clothes. Hart said she asked Emily why she was dressed up, and Emily said she had errands to run. She confirmed that statement during cross-examination. Our final witness to take the stand this morning was Paul Reeves, an expert in thermodynamics and energy modeling. He reconstructed the toolbox temperature - inside and out - and the body temperature. He said the temperature inside the toolbox was about the same as the outside temperature after two days. He said it was impossible to make the body colder. During cross-examination, Reeves said he did not consider but two layers of clothing when Emily was wearing four.
I gotta get back. I will return around lunch.
So, this morning we've heard from four witnesses. Bill Ramsey was the first on the stand, briefly. He simply talked about Emily's miniature horses and the search the night she went missing. In his opinion, Jerry was concerned Dec. 29, 2005. Sandra Smith was Jerry and Emily's hair dresser. She got a laugh out of the jurors, crowd and even Jerry. She told of a story when Jerry and his son Matt came to get their hair cut. Matt asked her about color hair gel and wanted her to put some in his dad's hair. Jerry agreed. He walked out of the salon with either blue or green, she said, spiked hair - well as much as Smith could spike it. Jerry it bald on top, with reddish hair around the sides and back of his head. Smith also testified she did Emily's hair on Dec. 28, 2005. She touched up her roots, Smith said. Emily had pretty blonde hair. Smith also did her hair for the funeral. Smith said Emily's hair was darker than when she did it on the 28th. What does that mean? Did Emily die her hair darker or did it have something to do with her trapped in a toolbox? Bellas did not cross-examination on either of these witnesses. He asked the next witnesses just two questions on cross-examination. Teresa Hart, a former manager at PD Grocery on Sawmills School Road, saw Emily almost every morning, including Dec. 29, 2005. That was an odd morning, Hart said, because Emily was all dressed up. She was in khaki pants, a tucked in shirt, a belt and brown loafers. Usually, Hart said, Emily would be in work clothes. Hart said she asked Emily why she was dressed up, and Emily said she had errands to run. She confirmed that statement during cross-examination. Our final witness to take the stand this morning was Paul Reeves, an expert in thermodynamics and energy modeling. He reconstructed the toolbox temperature - inside and out - and the body temperature. He said the temperature inside the toolbox was about the same as the outside temperature after two days. He said it was impossible to make the body colder. During cross-examination, Reeves said he did not consider but two layers of clothing when Emily was wearing four.
I gotta get back. I will return around lunch.
posted by THE HICKORY DAILY RECORD at at
11:02 AM
11 Comments:
Are you all still convinced of Jerry's guilt. Just because a husband and wife bicker or fuss does not make one guilty!!
OK, I’ll bite. I’ll state the obvious.
Emily was meeting someone. She dyed her hair. She put on fancier clothes. She previously told her sister she was leaving between Christmas and New Years and now here it was, two days to go and she was all gussied up.
Shame on the prosecution holding it out there as evidence that the Mexican workers didn’t see Emily again after she drove down the path with Mr. Anderson. They made it sound like that was the end of the line. But clearly multiple people saw her after that. Gosh, maybe the Mexican workers didn’t see her again because they had their backs turned or were focused on their work. Do ya think?
Trying to twist facts completely disgusts me. I will gladly accept anything that people will show to be true, for or against Mr. Anderson. But for the prosecution to imply what it did with the Mexican testimony should be grounds for disbarment!
JM,
Did a witness testify that Emily was wearing 4 layers of clothing when found in the toolbox? If so, who testified to that and what was she wearing?
So we have a witness to concur that Emily's hair was colored blonde the day she left but when her body was discovered, her hair was colored darker. While this is circumstantial evidence jurors are allowed to rely on their own personal experiences in determing facts in a case. I believe that a reasonable person would conclude that her hair was colored darker voluntarily rather than by force.
As to the state putting on more evidence, the only evidence that should be allowed is that evidence that serves to rebut a defense witness' testimony or any other evidence offered on behalf of the defense. The state cannot start putting on more evidence of the same nature as presented on their first round. I expect closing arguments will take at least a day, motions to dismiss at the end of all of the evidence will take a half day and istructions to the jury will take a half day. The jury will probably get the case on Thursday. I'm betting that unless the jury "hangs" we will have a verdict by the end of the week.
Re-Julius,
Is this not just some astonishing testimony from the hairdresser and the clerk at the store. I wonder if the Sheriff's office investigators spoke with either of them--probably not. Do you feel that Cayer will allow this to go to the jury if Dubs again ask for a dismissal at the end of her witnesses? If it goes to the jury the only way I see a conviction depends on how much weight the jury puts on the oil filters being back dated. No other testimony I've read about establishes anything beyond a reasonable doubt and there is no hard evidence at all except the oil filters. What is the make up of the jury ie.,men and women? I just do not see a conviction or a hung jury. I see a not guilty verdict and then a bunch of future legal action against the Sheriff's Office.
The oil filters; was there real proof WHO wrote the dates on them?
The hair; is it possible that Emilys hair had blood dried in it and when ME washed her off that it could have left the hair darker from the stain of blood?
I think that the judge will let it go to the jury that way he is safe.
It is difficult to know what Judge Cayer will do. On the one hand, he knows it is a sloppy capital murder case at best and any reasonable person would find reasonable doubt of Anderson's guilt - especially on a first degree, capital murder case. However, he cannot read the jurors minds nor can he know whether justice would be served to allow a man's life to be judged by this jury. I think it is safe to say that there are at least 3 jurors who are liberals. I believe that it will take more to pursuade them to convict Anderson on the evidence presented, knowing that there is a possibility he could be sentenced to death. If the judge really wants to shed the monkey from his back - he can let it go to the jury. Then the judge and the jury are charged with the most "painful" task of the entire trial - the jury instructions. Talk about nodding off - I've even seen a couple of judges become distracted while reading capital murder instructions to the jury! Boring!!!!!!!
First about the hair, if you hypothesis is correct, then her hair would have had to have been totally saturated to have the entire head of hair uniformly change color, and I haven't seen any mention of that much blood, nor have I ever heard of blood causing a change in hair color.
Second, I keep hearing about these oil filters. Point A, what evidence could possibly be contained in oil filters? Blood? Who would pour blood from a body they want to hide into a crankcase? And if they did, the chemicals in the oil would break it down. The same would be true of any soft tissue. The only thing that would possible remain would be bone fragments, and she isn't missing any, and again, how would they get inside there? My best opinion about the oil filters is that they have a warranty on that equipment, and that they have to keep the oil filters with the dates and hours of service to validate any warranty claims. You can do oil analysis of oil left in the filter and find out many things about the operation of an engine, and developing problems. In 23 years of LE experience, I have never seen, heard or joked about having to dissect an oil filter to look for evidence of a murder. Wood chippers are however a different story.
And one other thing Madam Defense Attorney, I wonder how many of the hired non English speaking help with aliases have received documentation since this inquiry (I don't want to say invest----- that's as far as I could get) began?
I thought it was the dates on the filters that was in question?
psycho, old boy, you need to lay off the hooch right before you post.
Retired Investegation, did you happen to notice she had on good clothes to go do errands, then she was found in work clothes, this is the woman who ran away.
Psychobabble,
Good choice for you!
No one has said anything about blood being in the crankcase or anything close to that. The Oil filters were ordered changed on 16 Jan 2006. Jerry also ordered the date and usage hours to be transfered to the new filters as 29 Dec 2005. And instructed the farm hands to say (IF ANYONE ASKED) that he changed the filters all day on the 29th of Dec. Just sounds like he was trying to establish an alibi. Now Psychobabble are you straight about the oil filters?
Post a Comment
<< Home