Cockayne murder trial underway
- Marcia (Mrs. Pete)
- Posts: 1576
- Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:40 pm
- Location: Madison Area, Wisconsin
-
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 3:03 pm
I wouldn't be too sure about a conviction. According to the article there were no actual eyewitnesses, one guy said he turned away to avoid seeing the assailant as he ran away. Most of the prosecution's evidence seems to be statements which the defendants made to other people. The defense is poking holes in the motives of the statement witnesses and pointing out inconsistencies. I ddin't see anything about any forensic evidence unfortuately so it sounds like its a circumstantail case. Not that the circumstances aren't strong but the burden of proof is hard thing to meet.
-
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 3:03 pm
Correct, what I guess I meant was that the article does not say if the witness identifed who it was he saw run away. According to the information in the article the eyewitness, and the man refered to as Frazier, the occupant of the home to which the defendant Ward ran, gave inconsitent statments. The eye witness says he saw Ward run to Frazier's house, that a man was already outside the house and they both jumped into a car and drove off. Again, only according to the article, Frazer said that he was asleep, awakened by his GF after Ward knocked on the door and then gave him a ride.SJfromNJ wrote:I think maybe you should reread the article. The eyewitness said at first he looked away but later watched as the suspect ran down the street and got into a maroon car.sailorgirl wrote:I wouldn't be too sure about a conviction. According to the article there were no actual eyewitnesses, one guy said he turned away to avoid seeing the assailant as he ran away. Most of the prosecution's evidence seems to be statements which the defendants made to other people. The defense is poking holes in the motives of the statement witnesses and pointing out inconsistencies. I ddin't see anything about any forensic evidence unfortuately so it sounds like its a circumstantail case. Not that the circumstances aren't strong but the burden of proof is hard thing to meet.
Its these kinds of inconsistences that make it hard to meet the burden of proof.
Guilty verdict for the murder for one, Assault for the other 2. Looks like the jury only needed a day.
http://www.stjohntradewindsnews.com//in ... 0&Itemid=1
http://www.stjohntradewindsnews.com//in ... 0&Itemid=1
-
- Posts: 612
- Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:06 pm
- Location: Kentucky
- Teresa_Rae
- Posts: 2053
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 5:44 pm
- Location: Downstate IL