+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: Archives (/forum-400.html)
+----- Forum: AACbbs Archives (/forum-418.html)
+------ Forum: Cincinnati Archives (/forum-932.html)
+------ Thread: Widmer's defense team files motion for acquittal (/thread-481641.html)
Widmer's defense team files motion for acquittal - ctipton - 02-15-2011 11:46 PM
Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder
7:35 PM, Feb. 15, 2011
The Enquirer/Cara Owsley
GUILTY: In his third trial, Ryan Widmer has been found guilty of murdering his wife, Sarah Widmer, in 2008 in their Hamilton Township home.
Written by
Janice Morse
jmorse@enquirer.com
LEBANON - For the second time, a Warren County jury has declared Ryan Widmer guilty of murder – and for the second time, his supporters were overcome with anguish and disbelief, while prosecutors declared that justice was done.
In a scene reminiscent of Widmer’s 2009 conviction in the bathtub-drowning of his wife, Sarah, 24, Widmer again tearfully professed his innocence after the verdict. “Judge, I didn’t do this,” he told Judge Neal Bronson. “This is not right. It’s not right.”
Widmer has stood trial three times: in 2009, when he was convicted but the verdict was set aside because of jury misconduct; last year, when jurors were deadlocked despite 30 hours of deliberations, believed to be the longest in Warren County history; and in the current trial which lasted 17 days before he was convicted Tuesday.
Bronson read the verdict, dismissed the jury and immediately sentenced Widmer to the mandatory term of 15 years to life in prison.
Deputies handcuffed Widmer and led him away as his family and other supporters sobbed, some calling out, “We love you, Ryan.”
His dad, Gary, tightly hugged his son’s lawyers. Then, as he walked outside the courthouse, he crumpled to his knees, weeping. Surrounded by a gaggle of reporters, he struggled to his feet and made his way to his vehicle. Asked what he’d like people to know about this son, he said, “He’s a caring, loving child … he’d never … I just don’t get it. I don’t get it. He didn’t do anything. How hard is that to see?”
The Enquirer/Cara Owsley
Gary Widmer, Ryan Widmer's father, breaks down after his son is found guilty of murdering Sarah Widmer.
Discussion of a possible appeal was being bandied about as relatives and supporters retreated to their cars. Widmer’s attorneys have 30 days to file an appeal.
Even observers with no stake in the case were taken aback by the relatively rapid decision jurors reached. The jurors spent 12 hours deliberating – nine hours shorter than Widmer’s first jury in 2009 and 18 hours shorter than his second jury last year.
“I was surprised both at the verdict and how fast it was reached,” said Thaddeus Hoffmeister of Wyoming, a University of Dayton law professor who closely followed the case. “I thought it would be either involuntary manslaughter or a hung jury – and I thought it would take a lot longer.”
The involuntary manslaughter charge would have applied if jurors thought that Widmer committed a misdemeanor assault on his wife, unintentionally killing her. Instead, jurors believed Widmer purposely killed his wife, so they convicted him of murder.
The courtroom nearly filled to capacity Tuesday as word traveled that the jury had reached a decision around 4:30 p.m. Everyone sat quietly for about 10 minutes as jurors filed into the courtroom before the foreman handed the verdict form to the judge. Gasps broke the silence when Bronson uttered the word “guilty.”
Sarah Widmer’s mother, Ruth Ann Steward, witnessed the outcome for the first time. She didn’t come into the courtroom to hear the verdict in Widmer’s first two trials.
Tuesday, she appeared stoic as the verdict was read. Prosecutors said she didn’t wish to comment.
After hearing the verdict, Widmer bent forward onto the defense table, holding his face in his hands and sobbing.
The Enquirer/Cara Owsley
Ryan Widmer breaks down as the verdict is announced.
When given the chance to speak to the judge, Widmer said he didn’t know what happened to his wife in 2008, and that his family had to hire doctors to try to find out.
“My life has been ruined. I loved Sarah. I would never hurt her, never,” he said. “This keeps going on and on. Twelve hours after she died and I’m charged.”
Afterward, the Warren County Prosecutor’s Office released a statement saying officials were “pleased the trial is over and that justice was done for Sarah and her family.”
”The jurors who have served on this case should be commended for their willingness to be a part of this process, and their diligence in reviewing the evidence,” Chief Assistant Prosecutor Bruce McGary said in the statement. “Recognition should also go to the dedicated men and women who have been involved in the case from start to finish. The diligent efforts of the Hamilton Township police and fire departments, the sheriff’s office and coroner, Dr. Russell Uptegrove, as well as the prosecution team, have worked tirelessly to ensure that justice was done.”
Attorneys for Widmer said they were too upset to comment as they left the courthouse. Widmer supporters and ordinary citizens appeared stunned by the verdict.
“When I walked in and saw their (the jury’s) faces, I knew (they had convicted Widmer),” said Mollie Mihalik of West Chester. “I need to go home and just cry my eyes out.”
Most spectators told reporters they were squarely against the verdict.
“It’s crushing for the Widmer family,” said Ginger Boyd of Lebanon. “I’m sorry for Sarah Widmer’s family, but the verdict was wrong.”
Widmer’s aunt, Jackie Cronin, said Widmer’s mother, Jill, has been too ill to attend the trial and, “It’s just destroyed our family. … My sister will never be the same.”
A woman who was a juror on the second Widmer trial also said she was shocked by the outcome.
“I can’t believe it. I’m stunned. I think it’s the most horrible thing. I’m so upset,” said the Hamilton Township juror, who attended three days of the third trial, including closing arguments. “I’m sorry, but they don’t know what happened that night and there’s reasonable doubt, there just is.”
The juror said she was concerned when she saw the current jurors’ conduct in court.
“I watched when they were hardly taking any notes,” she said. “There was so much technical testimony and I said to myself, ‘How can you remember that without taking notes?’”
The sparse note-taking made her wonder whether the jurors had made up their minds already. She pointed out that jurors in the second trial took copious notes and some had almost filled two legal pads with notes.
“We went through every piece of evidence – and they have more evidence than we had,” she said.
Mark Krumbein, a Cincinnati defense lawyer who has closely followed the case and attended portions of all three trials, said, “The jury came back pretty quickly for such a complicated case.” He thought if the deliberations had gone longer, that would have signaled that the jury was considering the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter. The jury was instructed to first consider the murder charge.
Mike Allen, a former Hamilton County prosecutor and current defense lawyer who attended parts of the trial, said, the prosecution had the advantage in trial No. 3.
“In the second trial, the defense was relentless in their questioning of first-responders and law-enforcement officers. In this trial, the prosecution stole their thunder by taking ownership of the mistakes in direct examination,” Allen said. “This seriously affected the defense’s ability to score points with the jury on the issue of the sloppiness of the investigation and the rush to judgment. That’s the advantage of trying the case two previous times.”
Allen also addressed a lingering question on many Widmer-watchers’ minds: Why did Ryan Widmer never take the witness stand in his own defense in any of his three trials?
“If there was any question as to why all of Ryan Widmer’s defense attorneys, pervious and present, did not want him to testify it was answered definitively with his statement at sentencing. It was self-serving, rambling and totally inappropriate under the circumstances,” Allen said.
Allen said Widmer’s attorneys will have a difficult time winning their expected appeal.
“There will certainly be an appeal in this case, but it would appear that there were no glaring legal errors in the third trial,” he said. “In addition, the appeal would go to the 12th District Court of Appeals, which is one of the most difficult courts in the state to get a reversal of a criminal conviction.”
“If there is any real superstar in this case, it is him. With the big egos in the courtroom and the intense media scrutiny, the case easily could have degenerated into OJ Simpson II,” Allen said. “Judge Bronson held the egos in check and conducted a near-error-free trial in my opinion.”
Krumbein, however, thinks there are at least two issues that could be important upon appeal: Judge Bronson’s refusal to grant Widmer’s lawyers more public money for expert witnesses’ fees, and the judge’s refusal to allow his lawyers to attack the credibility of Lt. Jeff Braley, the Hamilton Township police detective who led the investigation. His qualifications were misrepresented on his job application. Braley denied making the false claims, but a state crime lab handwriting analysis said the writing matched his. Braley remains employed with Hamilton Township; officials haven’t said what, if any, discipline he could face.
Joe Mooney, a Northern Kentucky University law student who attended parts of the Widmer trial, said, “From a student’s standpoint, the emotional reaction is unbelievable … not something you will ever experience in a classroom … to see the family members on both sides have the emotional reaction is something no textbook can prepare you for before you practice law.”
Mooney said he, too, was surprised at how quickly the verdict was reached, “but I think it shows how sure the jury was about his guilt.”
He doubts that “mystery witness” Jennifer Crew played much of a role. She’s the Iowa woman who claimed Widmer confessed he had killed his wife. Crew contacted Widmer after seeing his case featured on TV’s “Dateline NBC,” and says she kept the confession secret for months because she was afraid of him.
“I think, over time, the 911 call and the physical evidence might be more of a reason than believed,” Mooney said.
“Historically, this case will be studied for a long time,” he said. “At the end of the day, you cannot ignore the fact that most of the jurors that viewed the evidence believed he was guilty. But the reasons as to why they found him guilty will be studied for a long time, particularly since this case had so many twists.”
Staff writer Rachel Richardson contributed.
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110215/NEWS010702/302150035/Widmer-guilty-murder?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - 50Cent - 02-16-2011 07:11 AM
Look I don't know if he killed her or not. But from what I heard I don't know how you don t have reasonable doubt.
The witness from Iowa to me lacked any credibility and her story wasn't credible either. Mistakes by coroner. Mistakes by police. Case fueled by an overzealous Rachel hutzel who wanted to further her own aspirations and did so.
Sometimes juries act beyond their scope and beyond the evidence. Seemed like a short time to deliberate over a complex case to me. But when they asked for 911 tape and tub I figured they would find him guilty.
Let's just hope theydidnt send an innocent man to prison.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - SuperFlyBCat - 02-16-2011 07:53 AM
A case like should have been moved elsewhere. It seemed to me that a seizure of sorts could not be ruled out and
that how the autopsy was done would not reveal a seizure.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - Crewdogz - 02-16-2011 08:13 AM
I dont know how anyone can get a fair 3rd trial.
My understanding of this was that a 3rd trial was based upon this mystery witness that materialized after the 2nd trial. Then from the running commentary you hear on 700 WLW she played a minimal role in the 3rd trial and the prosecution used this trial to argue against successful arguments by the defense used in the 1st 2 trials...
Rumor mill starting today (heard on 700 WLW on my drive in) is that an appeal is in the works for him because the defense has some internet blogs where jurors supposedly had their minds made up he was guilty weeks ago.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - rath v2.0 - 02-16-2011 09:23 AM
You can't get a fair 3rd trial IMO. Prosecution had the playbook down pat. There was little chance he wasn't going down on some charge this time. Still think he made a mistake not testifying. Would have been worth it to rebut that strung out crazy ex stripper's testimony. Not saying he didn't do it.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - BearcatMan - 02-16-2011 09:43 AM
If the appeal goes through, and they find it to be a mistrail, am I right in saying that is the third strike and the charge is thrown out for good against him due to the ORC?
And I also agree, both in that there was a fairly great deal of reasonable doubt, and that there should have been a change in venue, as most people have been hearing about this case around here for 2+ years and probably had their minds made up. I know from what I've read, a lot of people on the jury seemed to not be interested in the earlier proceedings (not taking notes, talking amongst themselves during proceedings, etc.). I also feel that the judge did block a lot of motions that could've questioned the prosecution's witnesses' integrity, and could be strattling the line of whether or not this was a fair and impartial trail.
I personally dont think he did it, but I also feel that the court proceedings did nothing to extinguish reasonable doubt, which should have, in its own right, caused a not guilty verdict.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - QSECOFR - 02-16-2011 09:45 AM
WLW is reporting right now that there was juror misconduct in the 3rd trial such that a juror could go to jail.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - Murph29 - 02-16-2011 09:47 AM
Sounds like his lawyers had several criminal defense lawyers do mock crosses with him and he was so bad as a witness they didn't want him anywhere near the stand.
At the end of the day I don't think the female confession witness was necessary. They got a conviction the first time around without her and if you hear the 9-11 call in its entirety, the forensic evidence around bruising on the back of the neck which would've had nothing to do with intubation attempts or medic induced trauma, the hand prints sliding down the tub, the fact he says she's face down in the tub on the 9-11 call yet when medics arrive only minutes later she's on the floor totally dry except for her hair, the fact that the bathtub was extremely small, so small that if you see it you'd wonder how someone could force themselves underwater if they wanted to let alone slide down and drown accidentally. If you find your wife face down in a tub are you going to leave her in that position as you call 9-11 or pull her out and then call 9-11?
Anyway, there was quite a bit more evidence that supported a conviction beyond the female witness. I'm a bit surprised they even used her for fear it could distract from the more credible evidence. I do think a third trial like this is a stretch of the system. Finding unbiased jurors with that amount of publicity and two trials and also the prosecution being able to tailor their case by learning from the first two trials is not something you see very often.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - JackieTreehorn - 02-16-2011 09:53 AM
Heard some commentator on the radio(Deters?) say that since the jury knew he was convicted before but it was thrown out, he was sure he would be convicted this time. How can anyone allow a jury to be seated with such prejudicial knowledge? I'm not an attorney, but this sounds like complete BS to me. On appeal he should try to get a change of venue far, far away if possible.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - chicago bearcat - 02-16-2011 09:58 AM
(02-16-2011 09:45 AM)QSECOFR Wrote: WLW is reporting right now that there was juror misconduct in the 3rd trial such that a juror could go to jail.
Wow what a circus
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - Eastside_J - 02-16-2011 10:00 AM
(02-16-2011 09:47 AM)Murph29 Wrote: Sounds like his lawyers had several criminal defense lawyers do mock crosses with him and he was so bad as a witness they didn't want him anywhere near the stand.
At the end of the day I don't think the female confession witness was necessary. They got a conviction the first time around without her and if you hear the 9-11 call in its entirety, the forensic evidence around bruising on the back of the neck which would've had nothing to do with intubation attempts or medic induced trauma, the hand prints sliding down the tub, the fact he says she's face down in the tub on the 9-11 call yet when medics arrive only minutes later she's on the floor totally dry except for her hair, the fact that the bathtub was extremely small, so small that if you see it you'd wonder how someone could force themselves underwater if they wanted to let alone slide down and drown accidentally. If you find your wife face down in a tub are you going to leave her in that position as you call 9-11 or pull her out and then call 9-11?
Anyway, there was quite a bit more evidence that supported a conviction beyond the female witness. I'm a bit surprised they even used her for fear it could distract from the more credible evidence. I do think a third trial like this is a stretch of the system. Finding unbiased jurors with that amount of publicity and two trials and also the prosecution being able to tailor their case by learning from the first two trials is not something you see very often.
When I heard that summary description of what happened, how she was found, what Widmer did etc, I thought the same thing. Virtually zero chance he didn't do it.
You find your wife face down in a tub of water and your reaction is to pull the plug out to drain the water, leave here there and call 911? Please.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - Murph29 - 02-16-2011 10:01 AM
(02-16-2011 09:53 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote: Heard some commentator on the radio(Deters?) say that since the jury knew he was convicted before but it was thrown out, he was sure he would be convicted this time. How can anyone allow a jury to be seated with such prejudicial knowledge? I'm not an attorney, but this sounds like complete BS to me. On appeal he should try to get a change of venue far, far away if possible.
I do think they could've have avoided a lot of headaches and potential questioning of a verdict if they had just moved this thing before it started somewhere other than Warren County.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - chicago bearcat - 02-16-2011 10:07 AM
(02-16-2011 10:00 AM)Eastside_J Wrote:(02-16-2011 09:47 AM)Murph29 Wrote: Sounds like his lawyers had several criminal defense lawyers do mock crosses with him and he was so bad as a witness they didn't want him anywhere near the stand.
At the end of the day I don't think the female confession witness was necessary. They got a conviction the first time around without her and if you hear the 9-11 call in its entirety, the forensic evidence around bruising on the back of the neck which would've had nothing to do with intubation attempts or medic induced trauma, the hand prints sliding down the tub, the fact he says she's face down in the tub on the 9-11 call yet when medics arrive only minutes later she's on the floor totally dry except for her hair, the fact that the bathtub was extremely small, so small that if you see it you'd wonder how someone could force themselves underwater if they wanted to let alone slide down and drown accidentally. If you find your wife face down in a tub are you going to leave her in that position as you call 9-11 or pull her out and then call 9-11?
Anyway, there was quite a bit more evidence that supported a conviction beyond the female witness. I'm a bit surprised they even used her for fear it could distract from the more credible evidence. I do think a third trial like this is a stretch of the system. Finding unbiased jurors with that amount of publicity and two trials and also the prosecution being able to tailor their case by learning from the first two trials is not something you see very often.
When I heard that summary description of what happened, how she was found, what Widmer did etc, I thought the same thing. Virtually zero chance he didn't do it.
You find your wife face down in a tub of water and your reaction is to pull the plug out to drain the water, leave here there and call 911? Please.
In emergency situations people do react in sometimes irrational and stupid ways. The key here as noted above is that there was some reasonable doubt. There was no smoking gun like DNA evidence in an assault case.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - Murph29 - 02-16-2011 10:14 AM
(02-16-2011 10:07 AM)chicago bearcat Wrote:(02-16-2011 10:00 AM)Eastside_J Wrote:(02-16-2011 09:47 AM)Murph29 Wrote: Sounds like his lawyers had several criminal defense lawyers do mock crosses with him and he was so bad as a witness they didn't want him anywhere near the stand.
At the end of the day I don't think the female confession witness was necessary. They got a conviction the first time around without her and if you hear the 9-11 call in its entirety, the forensic evidence around bruising on the back of the neck which would've had nothing to do with intubation attempts or medic induced trauma, the hand prints sliding down the tub, the fact he says she's face down in the tub on the 9-11 call yet when medics arrive only minutes later she's on the floor totally dry except for her hair, the fact that the bathtub was extremely small, so small that if you see it you'd wonder how someone could force themselves underwater if they wanted to let alone slide down and drown accidentally. If you find your wife face down in a tub are you going to leave her in that position as you call 9-11 or pull her out and then call 9-11?
Anyway, there was quite a bit more evidence that supported a conviction beyond the female witness. I'm a bit surprised they even used her for fear it could distract from the more credible evidence. I do think a third trial like this is a stretch of the system. Finding unbiased jurors with that amount of publicity and two trials and also the prosecution being able to tailor their case by learning from the first two trials is not something you see very often.
When I heard that summary description of what happened, how she was found, what Widmer did etc, I thought the same thing. Virtually zero chance he didn't do it.
You find your wife face down in a tub of water and your reaction is to pull the plug out to drain the water, leave here there and call 911? Please.
In emergency situations people do react in sometimes irrational and stupid ways. The key here as noted above is that there was some reasonable doubt. There was no smoking gun like DNA evidence in an assault case.
How do you know there was reasonable doubt? The jurors were there and heard every piece of evidence and all I can say is that there was far more evidence the prosecution presented than the soundbites you hear on the radio or read in the news. Murder cases are often won with this type of evidence and without DNA.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - chicago bearcat - 02-16-2011 10:18 AM
(02-16-2011 10:14 AM)Murph29 Wrote:(02-16-2011 10:07 AM)chicago bearcat Wrote:(02-16-2011 10:00 AM)Eastside_J Wrote:(02-16-2011 09:47 AM)Murph29 Wrote: Sounds like his lawyers had several criminal defense lawyers do mock crosses with him and he was so bad as a witness they didn't want him anywhere near the stand.
At the end of the day I don't think the female confession witness was necessary. They got a conviction the first time around without her and if you hear the 9-11 call in its entirety, the forensic evidence around bruising on the back of the neck which would've had nothing to do with intubation attempts or medic induced trauma, the hand prints sliding down the tub, the fact he says she's face down in the tub on the 9-11 call yet when medics arrive only minutes later she's on the floor totally dry except for her hair, the fact that the bathtub was extremely small, so small that if you see it you'd wonder how someone could force themselves underwater if they wanted to let alone slide down and drown accidentally. If you find your wife face down in a tub are you going to leave her in that position as you call 9-11 or pull her out and then call 9-11?
Anyway, there was quite a bit more evidence that supported a conviction beyond the female witness. I'm a bit surprised they even used her for fear it could distract from the more credible evidence. I do think a third trial like this is a stretch of the system. Finding unbiased jurors with that amount of publicity and two trials and also the prosecution being able to tailor their case by learning from the first two trials is not something you see very often.
When I heard that summary description of what happened, how she was found, what Widmer did etc, I thought the same thing. Virtually zero chance he didn't do it.
You find your wife face down in a tub of water and your reaction is to pull the plug out to drain the water, leave here there and call 911? Please.
In emergency situations people do react in sometimes irrational and stupid ways. The key here as noted above is that there was some reasonable doubt. There was no smoking gun like DNA evidence in an assault case.
How do you know there was reasonable doubt? The jurors were there and heard every piece of evidence and all I can say is that there was far more evidence the prosecution presented than the soundbites you hear on the radio or read in the news. Murder cases are often won with this type of evidence and without DNA.
Im always hesitant to comment on any case because I do believe its somewhat foolish to do so without being on jury and seeing all evidence. However, Im comfortable commenting in this case because of what the concept of reasonable doubt is. In public the number of improprieties that has come to light is enough to cast reasonable doubt when a smoking gun is not present. Few trials ever devolve into the circus this one has because of the intense media scrutiny
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - bearcats23 - 02-16-2011 10:30 AM
And to add to the face down in the tub thing, he told a nurse at the hospital that he found her face up.
I think he probably did it, but if I'm on that jury I don't know if I can convict him because I believe that reasonable doubt exists.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - Tomcat - 02-16-2011 10:35 AM
(02-16-2011 10:18 AM)chicago bearcat Wrote:(02-16-2011 10:14 AM)Murph29 Wrote:(02-16-2011 10:07 AM)chicago bearcat Wrote:(02-16-2011 10:00 AM)Eastside_J Wrote:(02-16-2011 09:47 AM)Murph29 Wrote: Sounds like his lawyers had several criminal defense lawyers do mock crosses with him and he was so bad as a witness they didn't want him anywhere near the stand.
At the end of the day I don't think the female confession witness was necessary. They got a conviction the first time around without her and if you hear the 9-11 call in its entirety, the forensic evidence around bruising on the back of the neck which would've had nothing to do with intubation attempts or medic induced trauma, the hand prints sliding down the tub, the fact he says she's face down in the tub on the 9-11 call yet when medics arrive only minutes later she's on the floor totally dry except for her hair, the fact that the bathtub was extremely small, so small that if you see it you'd wonder how someone could force themselves underwater if they wanted to let alone slide down and drown accidentally. If you find your wife face down in a tub are you going to leave her in that position as you call 9-11 or pull her out and then call 9-11?
Anyway, there was quite a bit more evidence that supported a conviction beyond the female witness. I'm a bit surprised they even used her for fear it could distract from the more credible evidence. I do think a third trial like this is a stretch of the system. Finding unbiased jurors with that amount of publicity and two trials and also the prosecution being able to tailor their case by learning from the first two trials is not something you see very often.
When I heard that summary description of what happened, how she was found, what Widmer did etc, I thought the same thing. Virtually zero chance he didn't do it.
You find your wife face down in a tub of water and your reaction is to pull the plug out to drain the water, leave here there and call 911? Please.
In emergency situations people do react in sometimes irrational and stupid ways. The key here as noted above is that there was some reasonable doubt. There was no smoking gun like DNA evidence in an assault case.
How do you know there was reasonable doubt? The jurors were there and heard every piece of evidence and all I can say is that there was far more evidence the prosecution presented than the soundbites you hear on the radio or read in the news. Murder cases are often won with this type of evidence and without DNA.
Im always hesitant to comment on any case because I do believe its somewhat foolish to do so without being on jury and seeing all evidence. However, Im comfortable commenting in this case because of what the concept of reasonable doubt is. In public the number of improprieties that has come to light is enough to cast reasonable doubt when a smoking gun is not present. Few trials ever devolve into the circus this one has because of the intense media scrutiny
I think there was more reasonable doubt in this case then the OJ case and we know how that turned out. I would've had a hard time finding him guilty.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - Marcus - 02-16-2011 10:44 AM
I think he did it and there was a reason why he didn't go on the witness stand. He told too many people different stories about what happened. He likely would have crucified himself had he been on the stand.
That said, the witness from Iowa was an absolute joke. I mean why even bring someone like that into the trial? Its obvious she had no credibility whatsoever and was only doing it for her own 15 minutes of fame. I mean look at that idiots prior record. I'm shocked the judge allowed someone like that to be a factor in this trial.
As for reasonable doubt, I'm not sure if there was or wasn't. All we know is what we hear from the media, not what the jurors see or hear. There is a big difference in what they are hearing and what the media edits off to report to the public.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - SuperFlyBCat - 02-16-2011 11:11 AM
Curious, how did he kill her (if indeed did do it)? Did he choke her to death? Did he hold her underwater..........would there have been
defensive wounds like scratches and bruises all over her arms from fighting back. Just seems like this was the most
absolute quietest and least non violent murder crime scene. People say all kinds of inaccurate stuff on 911 calls, especially under
these kinds of circumstances. Seems like Sarah did not resist at all, if she was murdered.
RE: Ryan Widmer found guilty of murder - bearcatfan1211 - 02-16-2011 11:28 AM
Thats's the same problem I have with the case, how could she possibly let him drown her and not fight back.
I get the feeling that this case is far from over.