Quote:
Originally Posted by Webby
Kinda familiar with the case - and know there is an appeal due shortly.
On the witnesses defense - apparently the story the witnesses were giving could not be substantiated, but were conflicting in areas - and some were clearly lying.
Not familiar with the character of the defendant, tho he was more than stupid in attempting to buy people off.
|
I by no means consider myself an expert from watching dateline and reading a few websites
BUT...
It just seems like an unbelievable amount of proof:
1) 10 People see him at his magazine office during the times of the murder
2) He meets with a 3rd party business client during the times of the murder at his office...a well respected Nicaraguan journalist
3) Murder happens at 3 roughly; he claims to have rented a car right afterwards. Car company is no claiming he rented it 2 hours before....yet somehow his credit card transaction date/time is when he says he rented it and phone calls leading up to the rental are in his timeline
4) This same car rental place claims he sent someone on his behalf to pick up the car so he wasnt actually "there". Yet his CC credit card slip is a ringer for his signature
5) His cell phone records show phone calls made during the 2-3 hour drive down the crime scene. Triangulation of cell phone towers shows a steady line at the exact time he said he headed down there
6) One witness places him at the crime scene. A town drunk who was originally the prime suspect but exchanged a testimony against Eric Volz for immunity against all charges
#1- #5 get thrown out the day of the verdict by the judge and she finds him guilty.
Like I said in the beginning. I dont even want to pretend to be an expert; but come on.