I'm sure some of you remember this from December of 2009. We didn't hear about it, or pay attention if we did. However, we DID get to sit through the final day of this court hearing today. We heard everything today except for the jury's final decision. We were at court to observe something else, and were told there was a murder trial going on, so we went to that instead. We really wanted to stay to hear the jury's verdict, but had already been there for about 6.5 hours already and had other stuff to do today.
Here is the article before I forget.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...70/detail.html
I'll come post in here again later. I haven't even read the article yet. I just have to say that this was an awesome experience. We got to hear each sides closing arguments, saw the autopsy pictures, and it had to do with guns, which is something I am directly interested in.
I have to say that I had to stop myself from booing one of the prosecuting attorneys during her closing argument. She was waving a blue gun all over the court room, being very dramatic (playing to the jury's emotions), but most of all, she didn't know dick about guns and looked very stupid ranting up there with a blue gun. She went on and on about how you have to pull the trigger, then, with intent, "let the trigger ALL THE WAY OUT, before firing again." At one point, she actually said, "He pulled the trigger THREE times ladies and gentlemen. And don't forget that the first trigger pull was to load a bullet into the chamber."
I saw a picture of the gun, and it was a Glock. The forensic pathologist on the stand mentioned the ballistics of "a large caliber handgun" more than once, so I was assuming it was a .45 ACP model. What ever the full size .45 Glock is. Plus, the entry wounds looked to be the right size for a .45acp.
Oh yeah, the guy was on trial for either 1st degree murder, 2nd degree murder, or innocent. From what I saw today (the trial started on Tuesday), I personally probably would have only given him 2nd degree murder, but even then, just because that would have been because I would be following the rules of the court. He plead the 5th by the way, and we never heard him say a single thing. He just sat there the whole time. It was weird to hear the attorneys arguing over what they thought happened that day (no one was in the room and no witnesses), and to look over at the guy, and know that he was the ONLY person who knew what happened, but wasn't saying anything.
Guys from Channel 7 news and Channel 4 news were sitting behind us in the court (we were in the second row). The guy from Channel 7 was jabbing the keys on his laptop the whole time. Very distracting.
That's all. Discuss.




Reply With Quote


