Reply to Fairfax County Double Murder

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Fairfax County Double Murder"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

This is where the CW could have done more.  I worry she was too confident about her case.  Why not ask JM if she "read all the discovery and saw the evidence" before she flipped.  And/or call the detective who worked with JM.  I really really doubt she had access to any of this.  This is standard protocol and law enforcement 101.

They could anticipated this argument and handled in direct. I know the preference is not to recall a witness after the defense rests, but this was an option too. I would also have considered calling her back to rebut that they had broken up and make the points made here about the daughter calling her mommy, them staying in same hotel room, the fact she didn't leave the house after all this.  I assume VA is like everywhere else and cross of JM on rebuttal would be limited to her rebuttal testimony.

I know someone will say the CW wanted to keep the case simple.  I think she left loose ends. This was not a complicate case and a few more rebuttals would hve been fine.  I still believe he will be convicted but it is still frustrating.[/quote]

1st part: CW definitely did ask that to my recollection. Juliana obviously said no. By the time Juliana flipped she would have had access to discovery for sure, it was a long time after her arrest and a couple months after Brendan’s arrest. Do I think she read it all in any kind of informed way and then made up an untrue story that fits every part of it (minus Carrol’s grievance about the gun safe fingerprints) nope, not a chance.

I guess they did anticipate that she plead guilty and the co-defendant is not pleading not guilty so obviously the defense attorney is going to want to discredit her. This has been addressed by the CW extensively including in closing. But I think it would be weird and unnecessary to ask on direct before anything is brought up “did you read all the discovery in this case in order to make up this story?” CW only brought the mommy thing in because Carroll decided to call SF to belabor his point about everyone thinking Brendan was guilty. I think the issues with Miller are definitely a defense point but SF was really a blunder, that in no way helped his case. I don’t think they needed Juliana to respond to that, she already pled guilty, she would probably just say she didn’t remember and wasn’t thinking straight anyway.

Juliana may be the CW’s star witness but she isn’t really a star witness. She is obviously guilty and she did plead but imo she obviously wants to protect her “story” and her reputation after this is over. I believe that what she testified is the basic truth of that day, but she is minimizing her role definitely. Especially in the planning and acceleration of the plan and even when the CW was on direct she didn’t want to say which messages she typed, only “that was me or Brendan.” She’s going to play the victim later on dateline or whatever. CW had to manage this. They did well. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics