Nona Dirksmeyer, 2005 Miss Arkansas pageant contestant found dead in her apartment

[lorettalockhorn]

I had not heard anything about this car, until now: "James Evans also resides in the Ingelwood Apartments. He said that he and his wife are both bail bondsmen. He reported that he saw Dirksmeyer's car at her apartment at 8:10 a.m. He said around 2:30 p.m. he was talking to his brother outside the apartment complex. He said her car was in front of her apartment and that he also saw a green SUV. He said he had been to her door earlier in the week when he was inquiring about a dead cat he had found. He reported that Nona answered the door. He told the jurors that he did not see any damage to the door frame earlier in the week."
Reference...http://www.atkinschronicle.com/dt1.htm

Seems like there was a lot of talk back when about the "mystery vehicle".

[oxfordwebster]

Seems like there was a lot of talk back when about the "mystery vehicle".Some of the stooges mentioned Jeremy Martin a long time ago, but the posts were deleted.

[oxfordwebster]

I disagree with that conclusion. Morrison said that when a body is turned over, "fresh" (unclotted)blood could come out of a wound such as this case. He said it happenend to him while investigating murders a number of times. They both agreed that the amount of hair and the fact she was face down after being murdered, would cause a clot on the outside of the wound, thus almost "sealing" the blood inside.So, somehow, the fresh blood leaving the wound managed to avoid the coagulation on the wound on its way to Kevin's hands, avoiding a mixture of fresh and coagulated blood.

Kevin must have made a hell of a deal with that fresh blood to convince it to do that.

As for "sealing" the blood inside, Kilbourne's testimony showed that blood, even when attempting to mix with an anticoagulant, would show signs of coagulation even when "sealed."

[christina]

christina, you mentioned overhearing a prosecutor mention "taking the fifth" in a sidebar immediately prior to Trey's testimony. I have no reason to doubt you on this, so I am going to go with it.....

What criminal liability might Trey have opened himself up to in his testimony? Obviously the prosecution didn't suspect him of being the murderer. Given Trey's age and the fact that this is a college community, my best guess is drug dealing. If this is/was the case, it would cast some things about Trey's behavior and testimony in a different light for me. I'm going to have to ponder this......

(And once again, I want to express my GREAT APPRECIATION for what you have contributed here.)

Now that the gag order is lifted, this is a question I would like completely answered as well. The court reporter went up there with the lawyers so it will be on her tape/transcript.

Has it been been mentioned here yet that when Bean(the neighbor who saw an argument between a man and Nona) was asked by the defense if Jones (they pointed him out) was the boyfriend/man she saw she said no. Then the defene started to cue up a video. The prosecution objected before it cam on the screen and another sidebar. We could overhear just a few words. Later, I asked someone on the front row and was told the defense was going to show a segment of York's interview with police and ask Bean if that was the man she saw.

[christina]

Was she asked to leave the courtroom?

No one was asked to leave the room that I heard. Did you hear/see that?
I saw a sheriff and bailiff go over to the area and then Nona's family having a way cleared for them to leave. That was when I saw Ms Dipert go up and shake the judge's hand.

[christina]

So, somehow, the fresh blood leaving the wound managed to avoid the coagulation on the wound on its way to Kevin's hands, avoiding a mixture of fresh and coagulated blood.

Kevin must have made a hell of a deal with that fresh blood to convince it to do that.

As for "sealing" the blood inside, Kilbourne's testimony showed that blood, even when attempting to mix with an anticoagulant, would show signs of coagulation even when "sealed."

That was asked of a witness and a picture of the crime scene was shown again, with a hand print in blood between the body and the light bulb. It was suggested the rug was touched prior to the light bulb.

[lorettalockhorn]

Now that the gag order is lifted, this is a question I would like completely answered as well. The court reporter went up there with the lawyers so it will be on her tape/transcript.

Has it been been mentioned here yet that when Bean(the neighbor who saw an argument between a man and Nona) was asked by the defense if Jones (they pointed him out) was the boyfriend/man she saw she said no. Then the defene started to cue up a video. The prosecution objected before it cam on the screen and another sidebar. We could overhear just a few words. Later, I asked someone on the front row and was told the defense was going to show a segment of York's interview with police and ask Bean if that was the man she saw.


Didn't Bean testify that she never saw the man's face? What would actually have been the purpose of showing the video?

[oxfordwebster]

Later, I asked someone on the front row and was told the defense was going to show a segment of York's interview with police and ask Bean if that was the man she saw.And did she identify York? If she did, I missed that testimony. The defense never even called him back up to the stand.

[christina]

SusieQ has a banned edit under some of hers, I wonder if this has something to do with it? Lordy, Lordy!

I have asked and not gotten an answer as to what is delete worthy. I tried to send a private message to the moderator that posted that but it showed they had nothing set up. Can anyone answer this for me? It would be good to know where "the line" is.

[oxfordwebster]

No one was asked to leave the room that I heard. Did you hear/see that?
I saw a sheriff and bailiff go over to the area and then Nona's family having a way cleared for them to leave. That was when I saw Ms Dipert go up and shake the judge's hand.I didn't see or hear any of it. Let's just pretend that neither of us know what she said, because this isn't going to go anywhere.

[lorettalockhorn]

Some of the stooges mentioned Jeremy Martin a long time ago, but the posts were deleted.


Yeah, it's hard to research the three stooges and other banned personality unless they were quoted by others.

[christina]

Didn't Bean testify that she never saw the man's face? What would actually have been the purpose of showing the video?

She testified she had a ball cap on. Good question, I can only guess it was to show someone else being interviewed by police like Jones was.

[nobody]

That was asked of a witness and a picture of the crime scene was shown again, with a hand print in blood between the body and the light bulb. It was suggested the rug was touched prior to the light bulb.

I think there would have been cat hairs and carpet fibers, etc in the blood - if touched in this order.

[lorettalockhorn]

No one was asked to leave the room that I heard. Did you hear/see that?
I saw a sheriff and bailiff go over to the area and then Nona's family having a way cleared for them to leave. That was when I saw Ms Dipert go up and shake the judge's hand.


Wait. You lost me; who is Ms Dipert?

[christina]

I didn't see or hear any of it. Let's just pretend that neither of us know what she said, because this isn't going to go anywhere.

You can pretend. I really did not hear it but could tell it was not nice/intense by her face. It appeared a retort to whatever Mr Dipert said.

[oxfordwebster]

That was asked of a witness and a picture of the crime scene was shown again, with a hand print in blood between the body and the light bulb. It was suggested the rug was touched prior to the light bulb.Does touching a rug somehow change a mixture of fresh/coagulated blood on one's hands to a mixture of just fresh blood?

And on that note, I'm going to be out for a while. My back can't take chair for much longer, and solitaire is refusing to entertain me. I'll probably be back sometime soon.

Once again, like I left last night, I apologize to Christina for anything I've said that makes it sound like I'm doing anything other than trying to have a debate. Personal attacks don't belong here.

:punch:

Ha! That's just cute.

[lorettalockhorn]

She testified she had a ball cap on. Good question, I can only guess it was to show someone else being interviewed by police like Jones was.

Surely everyone would stipulate that York was interviewed.

[christina]

Wait. You lost me; who is Ms Dipert?

It was Nona's mother. I thought that is her name now.

[lorettalockhorn]

Does touching a rug somehow change a mixture of fresh/coagulated blood on one's hands to a mixture of just fresh blood?

And on that note, I'm going to be out for a while. My back can't take chair for much longer, and solitaire is refusing to entertain me. I'll probably be back sometime soon.

Once again, like I left last night, I apologize to Christina for anything I've said that makes it sound like I'm doing anything other than trying to have a debate. Personal attacks don't belong here.

:punch:

Ha! That's just cute.

You should switch to Tetris!

Love these two: :punch:

[christina]

And did she identify York? If she did, I missed that testimony. The defense never even called him back up to the stand.

No, the prosecution won and the video was not shown. She only gave a description.

[christina]

Surely everyone would stipulate that York was interviewed.

It was not told during the trial, so the jury did not know he was interviewed.

[lorettalockhorn]

It was Nona's mother. I thought that is her name now.

Oh okay, I thought that maybe you were referring to Dipert's unmarried daughter, if he has one. I guess I thought that Carol would be referred to as Mrs. Dipert. :shrug:

[christina]

I think there would have been cat hairs and carpet fibers, etc in the blood - if touched in this order.

Good point. The police said they did not collect any hairs or fibers at the scene because they all looked like Nona's. And the crime lab said they did not find anything unusual, that they did not expect to be there.
Maybe the defense experts could have done a third test, touching a carper then touching a light bulb.
The jury got to look at the light bulb up close. They also saw the tests and pictures and heard the testimony. That was one of the items they asked to look at during deliberations. I surmise they were talking about it like we are and determined it was not enough.

[upallnight]

Don't pretend to think that we know what the jury agreed with. They haven't explained anything.

The latent prints that aren't suitable for comparison? Bacon thought they were suitable, another latent print examiner said that they weren't and his colleagues agreed with him. We don't know if they were prints from Jones or not.

And even that, latent prints on something that is touched in a household are hard to take as seriously as a bloody print in that showed no evidence of coagulation.


In watching the new last night I think on channel 11 the female jury foreman spoke about the verdict, don't remember the exact words but came down to PA did not prove the case beyond rd. Said something about she felt God had put her there for a reason. Still not sure what she was trying to say, it seemed kind of rude to me since it was a murder case. I don't think that should have been said. She was only one of 12 plus alternates. Maybe she wanted to be the foreman, the times I sat on jury duty a hand came up wanting to be the foreman. I wonder if she wanted to be the foreman or if the rest of the jury selected her without her wanting to be the foreman. Anyway just seems weird and not sure why she mentioned God. Due to the fact it was on TV and maybe Nona's family was watching it seemed a little selfish to me. It seemed to be about her being on the jury with little about why the verdict was what it was.

[lorettalockhorn]

It was not told during the trial, so the jury did not know he was interviewed.

I don't get what the point of showing any video of York would have been if Bean never saw his face and didn't recognize him in person, there in the courtroom. The jury is surely smart enough to know that he was either interviewed or gave a deposition at some point. Doesn't change the fact that Bean couldn't identify him.

Or maybe I'm disremembering that he was pointed out to her during her testimony.

[oxfordwebster]

Anyway just seems weird and not sure why she mentioned God. Due to the fact it was on TV and maybe Nona's family was watching it seemed a little selfish to me. It seemed to be about her being on the jury with little about why the verdict was what it was.One last thing before I go, but I expect that we won't hear much from the jurors aside from similar statements. I think it is downright offensive to bring God into this and think it could also be something to bring comfort because they were in over their heads, yet made a decision quickly anyway. Cognitive dissonance is an extremely interesting topic to study.

And before anyone accuses me, like I've already said, I'm a very spiritual person. I just don't agree "God led us" when it should have been "we examined all of the evidence closely" alone.

[christina]

Does touching a rug somehow change a mixture of fresh/coagulated blood on one's hands to a mixture of just fresh blood?

And on that note, I'm going to be out for a while. My back can't take chair for much longer, and solitaire is refusing to entertain me. I'll probably be back sometime soon.

Once again, like I left last night, I apologize to Christina for anything I've said that makes it sound like I'm doing anything other than trying to have a debate. Personal attacks don't belong here.

:punch:

Ha! That's just cute.

I understand and need to go as well- my family is hollering for attention!

[upallnight]

I have asked and not gotten an answer as to what is delete worthy. I tried to send a private message to the moderator that posted that but it showed they had nothing set up. Can anyone answer this for me? It would be good to know where "the line" is.

I don't know, I just know there was a gag order as everyone is aware of, I wonder if that may have been delete worthy if found out someone under that gag order was posting, just a guess. Don't know why anyone would risk that but you never know. I would like to know also, everyone one is trying to get along on this board, it would be bad if that was to have happened but who knows.

[upallnight]

One last thing before I go, but I expect that we won't hear much from the jurors aside from similar statements. I think it is downright offensive to bring God into this and think it could also be something to bring comfort because they were in over their heads, yet made a decision quickly anyway. Cognitive dissonance is an extremely interesting topic to study.

And before anyone accuses me, like I've already said, I'm a very spiritual person. I just don't agree "God led us" when it should have been "we examined all of the evidence closely" alone.

Good comment, I agree!

[nobody]

According to a press release issued Friday morning by Russellville Police Chief Tom McMillen, “[t]he Russellville Police Department will be evaluating and debriefing on the Nona Dirksmeyer case; however, any future action on this case will be at the discretion of the Prosecuting Attorney. Our condolences go out to the victim’s family.”
Look for follow-up coverage on the RPD’s evaluation of its handling of the Dirksmeyer investigation and other issues surrounding the case in future editions of The Courier.

Reference: http://www.couriernews.com/story.php?ID=15471

?Doesn't the Prosecuting Attorney work for the city - is not the city asking for more information? I guess we will see what they say

[lorettalockhorn]

One last thing before I go, but I expect that we won't hear much from the jurors aside from similar statements. I think it is downright offensive to bring God into this and think it could also be something to bring comfort because they were in over their heads, yet made a decision quickly anyway. Cognitive dissonance is an extremely interesting topic to study.

And before anyone accuses me, like I've already said, I'm a very spiritual person. I just don't agree "God led us" when it should have been "we examined all of the evidence closely" alone.

I agree that the comment was minimally offensive. It was definitely out of place IMO. That the jury spent so little time considering such contradictory evidence and testimony makes me wonder if they simply could't come to grips with the technological aspects of it and couldn't begin to understand how Kilbourne's testimony didn't actually favor the defense.

I wonder how much God's influence on the foreperson played in the verdict or that there wasn't a hung jury; if she was invoking God during deliberations, might the other eleven have felt that they would be ostracized for standing up to her? Who knows? Maybe God was leading them all individually.

[lorettalockhorn]

According to a press release issued Friday morning by Russellville Police Chief Tom McMillen, “[t]he Russellville Police Department will be evaluating and debriefing on the Nona Dirksmeyer case; however, any future action on this case will be at the discretion of the Prosecuting Attorney. Our condolences go out to the victim’s family.”
Look for follow-up coverage on the RPD’s evaluation of its handling of the Dirksmeyer investigation and other issues surrounding the case in future editions of The Courier.

Reference: http://www.couriernews.com/story.php?ID=15471

?Doesn't the Prosecuting Attorney work for the city - is not the city asking for more information? I guess we will see what they say

The prosecuting attorney represents a the fifth judicial district (Pope, Johnson, Franklin counties), which includes Russellville, but he is not a city employee.

[TJEddie]

Sorry to be so slow. I was here when the delete thing occurred. Some new poster came on and was being quite disruptive.....I can't even tell you the content of his/her posts as I was glossing over them. Anyway, as I saw it, the mod posted that warning and shortly thereafter the posts were gone.

[nobody]

a copy & paste from old news:

The defense called a half-dozen or so witnesses including a newspaper reporter who ran from Channel 7’s cameras after she testified to posting about the Dirksmeyer case on crime message boards under an assumed name.

Reference: http://www.katv.com/news/stories/0607/431257.html

[jonikay]

[/B]

What would verify that for you? After hearing it in the courtroom peanut gallery, I asked and got it confirmed by an officer.

The rumor about Jones saying he "watched a lot of Law and Order" was dispelled during the trial. The officer that he said that to testified that when he asked Jones to go with another officer back to the police station that night, he informed Jones that it was policy to be patted down prior to riding in a squad car. To which Jones said, "yeah I know, I've watched Law and Order".

On the voluntary interview tape(why did the prosecution not show the interrogation of Jones?) Jones, while alone, went to the door to ask an officer something. When he tried the door it was locked so he knocked.
Funny thing, Christina . . . Kevin didn't even say "Law and Order," he said "CSI." I guess either we missed the explanation of the reason the PCS stated "Law and Order," or they didn't say it correctly on the PCS . . .

Also, as far as wondering why Trey didn't produce a receipt of a statement showing he had gotten gas at Exxon when he said, he wasn't asked on the stand to show it or noone had it to show. Just like when he was continually told by the defense, "you told the police this, you told the police that . . ." Trey would say, "no, I never said that." And much unlike the defense taking numerous statements and billing documents from Trey's cell phone to the stand for Trey to see and confirm, they never took his statements to Trey to confirm that he was fibbing, as the defense was telling him (and the jury) he was doing. Trey would simply deny that he had said anything to that effect when the defense was trying to get him to say what they wanted him to. IMO, it was a very good tactic by the defense to plant a little seed in the minds of the jury, even when what the defense was saying was a lie. Needless to say, the seeds planted grew to become reasonable doubt.

[optimumprimal78]

I agree with the earlier comment about how the jury said that God led them to make a decision instead of the evidence. I am sure that being in a case like this is hard for a jury and that they had to pray about their decision but I haven't heard anything from a juror mentioning the evidence presented. It's almost like they were basing their opinion on how they felt instead of what was presented to them in the case. Please correct me if any of you have seen where a juror mentioned that the evidence made the difference.

[christina]

Funny thing, Christina . . . Kevin didn't even say "Law and Order," he said "CSI." I guess either we missed the explanation of the reason the PCS stated "Law and Order," or they didn't say it correctly on the PCS . . .

Also, as far as wondering why Trey didn't produce a receipt of a statement showing he had gotten gas at Exxon when he said, he wasn't asked on the stand to show it or noone had it to show. Just like when he was continually told by the defense, "you told the police this, you told the police that . . ." Trey would say, "no, I never said that." And much unlike the defense taking numerous statements and billing documents from Trey's cell phone to the stand for Trey to see and confirm, they never took his statements to Trey to confirm that he was fibbing, as the defense was telling him (and the jury) he was doing. Trey would simply deny that he had said anything to that effect when the defense was trying to get him to say what they wanted him to. IMO, it was a very good tactic by the defense to plant a little seed in the minds of the jury, even when what the defense was saying was a lie. Needless to say, the seeds planted grew to become reasonable doubt.

My notes show an Officer Edgen as stating Jones said Law and Order.
As for the receipt from York, I covered that in an earlier post-
York was the prosecution's witness, they asked him about his alibi anticipating the defense, but yet the prosecution did not put the receipt into evidence. Remember Jonikay- the defense can not supoena things like receipts and phone records. They can only use what the prosecution secures.

[doverite]

Christina, I had a friend at the closing statements. She said the shower was wet. Did you hear this?

[lorettalockhorn]

I agree with the earlier comment about how the jury said that God led them to make a decision instead of the evidence. I am sure that being in a case like this is hard for a jury and that they had to pray about their decision but I haven't heard anything from a juror mentioning the evidence presented. It's almost like they were basing their opinion on how they felt instead of what was presented to them in the case. Please correct me if any of you have seen where a juror mentioned that the evidence made the difference.

Exactly. My personal feeling is that the jury, unable to sort out the conflicting technical evidence, may have moved to a more visceral feel for what had been presented. Had KJ been portrayed as the drinking, drugging personality that he is, rather than the butter won't melt in the mouth type that the defense set forth, maybe the outcome would have been different. Not to mention that little was made of the fact that his definition of "very, very exclusive" wasn't presented in light of the fact that he was screwing around. Nona was maligned in the sense that there was testimony from JH that they had had sex. (Can anyone verify that he testified that they had a liaison in a music room at Tech?) Yet there was no testimony to buttress the fact that KJo was having casual sex while planning a proposal.

[lorettalockhorn]

My notes show an Officer Edgen as stating Jones said Law and Order.
As for the receipt from York, I covered that in an earlier post-
York was the prosecution's witness, they asked him about his alibi anticipating the defense, but yet the prosecution did not put the receipt into evidence. Remember Jonikay- the defense can not supoena things like receipts and phone records. They can only use what the prosecution secures.

Is it typical for a witness to provide receipts while performing the duty of testifying in a case?

Anyone? Bueller?

Honestly, I wonder if York was uncooperative with either the prosecution or defense. I've heard just as much rumor that RW is involved (outside this thread) as I have heard speculation (inside the thread) that York was involved.

[jonikay]

My notes show an Officer Edgen as stating Jones said Law and Order.
As for the receipt from York, I covered that in an earlier post-
York was the prosecution's witness, they asked him about his alibi anticipating the defense, but yet the prosecution did not put the receipt into evidence. Remember Jonikay- the defense can not supoena things like receipts and phone records. They can only use what the prosecution secures.
Your notes were wrong on this one. I'm coming right out to say it this time. This isn't a huge point or it doesn't even matter as far as the investigation goes, but he said "CSI," not Law and Order. I heard it, I wrote it, and I know. It's funny how your notes of the testimony and mine aren't only showing different perspectives, but different facts. Anyway, I know that the defense can't bring extra evidence, etc. My main point of that post was to show that even though the defense stated that Trey was continuosly lying on the stand and contradicting the statements he had given police, they never showed proof, even when they acted as though (by looking down at paperwork, seemingly reading) they were looking at his statements given to police. You know they had the statements and they never read from them or anything, just kept saying that he was lying. They never even stated to the jury what he was lying about or what was said in the police statements.

For the record (and I don't even know who first brought this up), Jordan Harris gave no testimony whatsoever to having sex with Nona in the music room. While on the stand, he testified to having sex with her in July when he drove from Springdale to her apartment in the middle of the night (and anyone interested in this story can look it up in previous posts). He said it happened once, so that's when it was. Nothing was ever said about doing anything in a music room except for having a piano class that both were enrolled in.

Other than this thread, which normally consists of 4 to 8 people giving opinions here or there, the main rumor I am hearing is of Whiteside's involvement in a cover-up and I never hear mention of Trey York, other than right here.

[lorettalockhorn]

Your notes were wrong on this one. I'm coming right out to say it this time. This isn't a huge point or it doesn't even matter as far as the investigation goes, but he said "CSI," not Law and Order. I heard it, I wrote it, and I know. It's funny how your notes of the testimony and mine aren't only showing different perspectives, but different facts. Anyway, I know that the defense can't bring extra evidence, etc. My main point of that post was to show that even though the defense stated that Trey was continuosly lying on the stand and contradicting the statements he had given police, they never showed proof, even when they acted as though (by looking down at paperwork, seemingly reading) they were looking at his statements given to police. You know they had the statements and they never read from them or anything, just kept saying that he was lying. They never even stated to the jury what he was lying about or what was said in the police statements.

For the record (and I don't even know who first brought this up), Jordan Harris gave no testimony whatsoever to having sex with Nona in the music room. While on the stand, he testified to having sex with her in July when he drove from Springdale to her apartment in the middle of the night (and anyone interested in this story can look it up in previous posts). He said it happened once, so that's when it was. Nothing was ever said about doing anything in a music room except for having a piano class that both were enrolled in.

Other than this thread, which normally consists of 4 to 8 people giving opinions here or there, the main rumor I am hearing is of Whiteside's involvement in a cover-up and I never hear mention of Trey York, other than right here.

Thanks jk. I've asked over and over about JH's testimony. I've never read anywhere but on this board that the music room tryst occurred. I would think that some salacious reporter would have seized on the information by now. If it is untrue that Nona & JH had some sort of tryst in Witherspoon, it would seem to me that not only is Nona being libeled, but so is ATU. This is something that tuition paying parents should be concerned about. Just my two cents.

[nobody]

I know this is no joking forum - but I couldn't help but snicker at this:

Through my google-search I came upon this website: http://blacknewschannel.com/black-sports/kevin-jones.html

Take a look and see for yourself, did they think he was a black person? I think he is in a list of other black atheletes. I don't know.

Ok, ok - back to the matter at hand...

[lorettalockhorn]

I know this is no joking forum - but I couldn't help but snicker at this:

Through my google-search I came upon this website: http://blacknewschannel.com/black-sports/kevin-jones.html

Take a look and see for yourself, did they think he was a black person? I think he is in a list of other black atheletes. I don't know.

Ok, ok - back to the matter at hand...


Poor Kevin Jones the NFL player!

But seriously, I think that when sites subscribe to RSS for instance, it doesn't differentiate from the type of information that is supplied to their server. The equpment simply can't tell the difference between a Dutch boy looking indicted murderer and a hulking black running back Lion (or whoever he plays for).

[TJEddie]

Hi, christina.....it's me again.

If I remember correctly, you said that Trey not only had an attorney present when he was interviewed, but that his attorney was also reportedly present when he testified. I'd appreciate it if you could confirm/deny/correct my recollection on that......

While I can understand the argument for having an attorney present while being questioned by police, I would have more trouble understanding why an attorney would (presumably) travel several hours to be present when a client testified in a case where he was reportedly just a timeline witness. And then there was that sidebar remark about "taking the fifth" just prior to Trey's testimony. It just appears to me that there was something that Trey (and his attorney) were really, really worried might come up. I'm curious.

[lorettalockhorn]

Hi, christina.....it's me again.

If I remember correctly, you said that Trey not only had an attorney present when he was interviewed, but that his attorney was also reportedly present when he testified. I'd appreciate it if you could confirm/deny/correct my recollection on that......

While I can understand the argument for having an attorney present while being questioned by police, I would have more trouble understanding why an attorney would (presumably) travel several hours to be present when a client testified in a case where he was reportedly just a timeline witness. And then there was that sidebar remark about "taking the fifth" just prior to Trey's testimony. It just appears to me that there was something that Trey (and his attorney) were really, really worried might come up. I'm curious.

Hey Eddie. I've been trying to get confirmation of this information for days. I don't find anything odd about it at all. And especially if, as someone pointed out, the attorney could have been a family member. If York was even considering taking the fifth, he might want this apparition of an attorney in the courtroom to signal him when to do so.

[TJEddie]

Hey Eddie. I've been trying to get confirmation of this information for days. I don't find anything odd about it at all. And especially if, as someone pointed out, the attorney could have been a family member. If York was even considering taking the fifth, he might want this apparition of an attorney in the courtroom to signal him when to do so.

Once again, you got the point of my question.....why might Trey have been considering taking the fifth? I was hoping christina might be able to ask around and come up with some more info on this.

[lorettalockhorn]

Once again, you got the point of my question.....why might Trey have been considering taking the fifth? I was hoping christina might be able to ask around and come up with some more info on this.


You will have to pardon my skepticism, but Christina cites an officer who apparently wore no name tag and is now working elsewhere (how does she know that if she doesn't know his name?), as the one who told her that York had an attorney present for questioning and/or court. She also is being contradicted by jonikay who was present in court with regard to her report that JH testified that he had a sexual union with Nona in a music room at Tech. I honestly would like to see those issues addressed before I consider whether or not attorneys were actually talking about York and/or his taking the fifth or not. Let alone why. (I guess the obvious assumption would be that his attorney might have felt that he was to be railroaded on the witness stand.)

[christina]

Your notes were wrong on this one. I'm coming right out to say it this time. This isn't a huge point or it doesn't even matter as far as the investigation goes, but he said "CSI," not Law and Order. I heard it, I wrote it, and I know. It's funny how your notes of the testimony and mine aren't only showing different perspectives, but different facts. Anyway, I know that the defense can't bring extra evidence, etc. My main point of that post was to show that even though the defense stated that Trey was continuosly lying on the stand and contradicting the statements he had given police, they never showed proof, even when they acted as though (by looking down at paperwork, seemingly reading) they were looking at his statements given to police. You know they had the statements and they never read from them or anything, just kept saying that he was lying. They never even stated to the jury what he was lying about or what was said in the police statements.

For the record (and I don't even know who first brought this up), Jordan Harris gave no testimony whatsoever to having sex with Nona in the music room. While on the stand, he testified to having sex with her in July when he drove from Springdale to her apartment in the middle of the night (and anyone interested in this story can look it up in previous posts). He said it happened once, so that's when it was. Nothing was ever said about doing anything in a music room except for having a piano class that both were enrolled in.

Other than this thread, which normally consists of 4 to 8 people giving opinions here or there, the main rumor I am hearing is of Whiteside's involvement in a cover-up and I never hear mention of Trey York, other than right here.

I have re read my notes and will concede this one. I thought for sure I wrote Law and Order. I do have that Edgen was on scene at 6:40 and he was the officer that took Jones over to the stairs to talk with him and he was the officer that asked for and secured Jones' phone. Is that what you wrote down?

This rude/snide remark is un neccessary. I am trieing to be as truthful as I can. If i miss something I admit it.

I do not know this and believe you can't either. I do wonder why the prosectution, knowing the defense would go after York, did not have this in hand ready to present.

Apparantly you were not in the courtroom when the defense cross examined Mr. Harris. After the prosecution asked Mr Harris what he was working as this summer. "I am working as a Christian camp counselor", it was a bit embarrassing then when the defense followed up with, "I do not mean to sound like Clinton, but when I ask if that was the only time you had sex, I am not just meaning intercourse." To which Mr Harris replied, "Oh, well then we did it more than once". The defense, "are you talking oral sex?". Mr Harris, "yes". "And was that at Nona's apartment?". Mr Harris, "no, it was at a music room at tech".

[christina]

You will have to pardon my skepticism, but Christina cites an officer who apparently wore no name tag and is now working elsewhere (how does she know that if she doesn't know his name?), as the one who told her that York had an attorney present for questioning and/or court. She also is being contradicted by jonikay who was present in court with regard to her report that JH testified that he had a sexual union with Nona in a music room at Tech. I honestly would like to see those issues addressed before I consider whether or not attorneys were actually talking about York and/or his taking the fifth or not. Let alone why. (I guess the obvious assumption would be that his attorney might have felt that he was to be railroaded on the witness stand.)

So, this is you calling me a liar Loretta? That is sad. I have tried to report back as accurately as I could to this blog. Have I made mistakes, most likely. Intended mistakes? No. I wanted to be helpful.

The officer had a suit on, I do not believe any officer entered the courtroom with a badge/name tag on. I have gone through my notes and asked someone else. The officer's name is Waid.

Jonikay has admitted she has only been in court a few times and not all day, every day. I stand by what I heard Harris say and will wait to see it in the court reporters record.

Again, the court reporters record will show what was said at the sidebar prior to York's testimony. I overheard "taking the fifth" from one of the prosecutor's.

[christina]

Christina, I had a friend at the closing statements. She said the shower was wet. Did you hear this?

Yes, Frost testified to this as well. He took pictures of it.

[oxfordwebster]

Yes, Frost testified to this as well. He took pictures of it.I wonder if Nona was taking a shower when the killer came to her apartment? Sounds like someone with a key would have been able to get in easily like that.

[christina]

Hi, christina.....it's me again.

If I remember correctly, you said that Trey not only had an attorney present when he was interviewed, but that his attorney was also reportedly present when he testified. I'd appreciate it if you could confirm/deny/correct my recollection on that......

While I can understand the argument for having an attorney present while being questioned by police, I would have more trouble understanding why an attorney would (presumably) travel several hours to be present when a client testified in a case where he was reportedly just a timeline witness. And then there was that sidebar remark about "taking the fifth" just prior to Trey's testimony. It just appears to me that there was something that Trey (and his attorney) were really, really worried might come up. I'm curious.

I was told this by an officer, about the interview, and had a man pointed out to me at the trial. Since I am being called a liar now, I will call the prosecutor's office Monday and see if someone will answer this for me.

[lorettalockhorn]

So, this is you calling me a liar Loretta? That is sad. I have tried to report back as accurately as I could to this blog. Have I made mistakes, most likely. Intended mistakes? No. I wanted to be helpful.

The officer had a suit on, I do not believe any officer entered the courtroom with a badge/name tag on. I have gone through my notes and asked someone else. The officer's name is Waid.

Jonikay has admitted she has only been in court a few times and not all day, every day. I stand by what I heard Harris say and will wait to see it in the court reporters record.

Again, the court reporters record will show what was said at the sidebar prior to York's testimony. I overheard "taking the fifth" from one of the prosecutor's.

Not calling you a liar at all. Please do not put words into my mouth. But I have asked ad infinitum for it to be verified that JH did indeed testify that he and Nona had a sexual encounter in a music room and not only did you not verify it, you only now have the name of an officer. When we have contradicting reports, we are allowed to question, are we not? Isn't that what the jury had to do?

With regard to the court record, I haven't read it. I doubt that it is available. Maybe it is. I, along with everyone else, are at the mercy of unbiased reporting from anyone who is willing to give it.

If you reported that Waid was the officer who told you that York had an attorney present at interview and in court before this, you have my sincere apologies for even daring to question why you were reticent to name him before. I am somewhat curious as to how you were able to come up with Waid's name at this point. Why not simply have named him before?

[lorettalockhorn]

Yes, Frost testified to this as well. He took pictures of it.

The shower was wet 6-8 hours after the murder?

Wow. That sounds important.

[christina]

Not calling you a liar at all. But I have asked ad infinitum for it to be varified that JH did indeed testify that he and Nona had a sexual encounter in a music room and not only did you not verify it, you only now have the name of an officer. When we have contradicting reports, we are allowed to question, are we not? Isn't that what the jury had to do?

With regard to the court record, I haven't read it. I doubt that it is available. Maybe it is. I, along with everyone else, are at the mercy of unbiased reporting from anyone who is willing to give it.

If you reported that Waid was the officer who told you that York had an attorney present at interview and in court before this, you have my sincere apologies for even daring to question why you were reticent to name him before. I am somewhat curious as to how you were able to come up with Waid's name at this point. Why not simply have named him before?

Questioning is always good. I support that.
Anyone in the courtroom can testify that Harris admitted to having oral sex with Nona at tech. Oxford? Anyone else?
The court record can be purchased from the court reporter now that the trial is over.

As for the officer's name- it was in my notes, if I did not say it prior to this- sorry. Again though, I will be asking someone at the sidebar about York pleading the fifth.

[christina]

The shower was wet 6-8 hours after the murder?

Wow. That sounds important.

I believe the tetimony was that it "appeared wet".

[sololobo]

Perhaps we should consider the slim possibility of a serial sexual predator/murderer. I know several on this board are keeping up with the thread here about the Nina Ingram murder case in Fayetteville. Are there any similarities between these two murders? Also, has anyone heard anything about the rape of an ATU coed in her apartment a couple of weeks ago?

http://boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?t=280694&highlight=nina+ingram

[lorettalockhorn]

Questioning is always good. I support that.
Anyone in the courtroom can testify that Harris admitted to having oral sex with Nona at tech. Oxford? Anyone else?
The court record can be purchased from the court reporter now that the trial is over.

As for the officer's name- it was in my notes, if I did not say it prior to this- sorry. Again though, I will be asking someone at the sidebar about York pleading the fifth.

Yes, questioning is good. That is why I have asked repeatedly who gave you the information. You told me that you did not know. Until now. Unless, I have not read the posts where the question was answered. Feel free to correct me with any previous post.

I apologize to anyone who has read this thread or will read this thread for badgering Christina about whomever may have told her that York had an attorney in the wee hours of the morning and in court.

Cannot believe that some salacious reporter hasn't seized on this before if it is indeed important. Now all that remains, is who the heckle and jeckle is the attorney?

[oxfordwebster]

I believe the tetimony was that it "appeared wet".Did the defense perform any tests to confirm when the shower would have been dry?

:biggrin:

[TJEddie]

I was told this by an officer, about the interview, and had a man pointed out to me at the trial. Since I am being called a liar now, I will call the prosecutor's office Monday and see if someone will answer this for me.

Thank you, christina.

(And if I see my posts to you being overused as launching pads for attacks, I'll just start using PM.)

[sololobo]

Thank you, christina.

(And if I see my posts to you being overused as launching pads for attacks, I'll just start using PM.)

I also want to thank you, Christina. Everyday during the trial, everyone at my work would read the paper and then wanted to know what christina said about the trial. Your reporting was well respected.

[christina]

Did the defense perform any tests to confirm when the shower would have been dry?

:biggrin:

Thank you for picking up on that- we appear to have a bit of the same sense of humor. Cheers- tonight is Michelob Light for me!

[oxfordwebster]

I'd like to present some Bristow comedy theater.

After the verdict was read:

"The defense found evidence that was not found by the Arkansas Crime Lab that detected male DNA on a condom wrapper near the body,” defense attorney Bill Bristow says. “We also found some four inches from her head, a finger nail with male DNA not belonging to Kevin."

And now, the defense's own expert:

But during cross-examination, he clarified that he did not think the fingernail came off during a struggle with Dirksmeyer. He said he did not know when the fingernail got on the carpet.

Oh, but these guys are smart enough to know that people don't follow this stuff that closely anyway, especially the people watching on TV.

[oxfordwebster]

Thank you for picking up on that- we appear to have a bit of the same sense of humor. Cheers- tonight is Michelob Light for me!Thanks for telling me! I was a little sad when you didn't tell me last night what you were drinking when I asked. :)

[jonikay]

So, this is you calling me a liar Loretta? That is sad. I have tried to report back as accurately as I could to this blog. Have I made mistakes, most likely. Intended mistakes? No. I wanted to be helpful.

The officer had a suit on, I do not believe any officer entered the courtroom with a badge/name tag on. I have gone through my notes and asked someone else. The officer's name is Waid.

Jonikay has admitted she has only been in court a few times and not all day, every day. I stand by what I heard Harris say and will wait to see it in the court reporters record.

Again, the court reporters record will show what was said at the sidebar prior to York's testimony. I overheard "taking the fifth" from one of the prosecutor's.
OK . . . as far as Trey and an attorney go . . . I have no idea if Trey had an attorney with him or not. I did see him about 830am on one of the days that I was there with a man, but I figured it was his dad. It very well could have been an attorney. Trey was obviously very nervous, as anyone in his situation would be. The defense alluded to the cake pans several different times throughout the trial, even when Trey wasn't there. He was the defense's main "reasonable doubt" man. And they used him to their advantage. I do remember a John Waid who testified regarding the night of the murder and was seen interrogating Kevin for a short time. He is now living in Nebraska for some security company and left Russellville a while back. I guess that could be him, but I don't know how he would have a clue.
You don't have any idea how I would know what? That the defense had Trey's statements? Do you think the defense questioned him on the stand and used the words "you told the police that . . . " without having the statements, along with cell records and documents they presented? I'm not sure I know exactly what you're talking about on this one.
As far as Jordan and the oral sex thing . . . I counted the one time that he stated they had sex in July. I know they had oral sex in May. He testified to that fact and I have stated it in earlier posts. And the part about him having oral sex in Witherspoon, I never heard it. I can't disregard your word on it, though. I was there for Trey's, as well as Jordan's whole testimony. Did a person beside or behind you ever confirm that this was said? Anyway, as far as being a Christian Camp Counselor and engaging in such acts (in the past as far as we know, who knows about the present or the future) . . . Kevin Jones himself was in the paper not long ago at all for helping some church youth group, and it is public knowledge that he had more than one sexual partner and engaged in other illegal activities, such as drugs and drinking underage. . . so, . . .
I am not calling you a liar . . . if you choose to call me one, you may. I can always admit when I possibly didn't hear something or misunderstood, I've done it before (several times, actually) . . . Sorry I offended you, you can let me know next time I do so, and like you, I will try to reword my posts so that you can understand my point a little better.

[doverite]

Yes, Frost testified to this as well. He took pictures of it.

Everyone says Kevin didn't have time to commit the murder, stage the crime scene, go home change clothes, and be at the Bayou for lunch. Didn't he have clothes in his car that he was taking to Marva's? That would keep him from having to drive back home from Rsvl. to change clothes. I know how long this can take because I only live three miles from him. From Nona's apartment to his house takes 25 to 30 minutes. ( Depends on how many red lights you hit) Then back to Dover is another 7 min.

[oxfordwebster]

Everyone says Kevin didn't have time to commit the murder, stage the crime scene, go home change clothes, and be at the Bayou for lunch. Didn't he have clothes in his car that he was taking to Marva's? That would keep him from having to drive back home from Rsvl. to change clothes. I know how long this can take because I only live three miles from him. From Nona's apartment to his house takes 25 to 30 minutes. ( Depends on how many red lights you hit) Then back to Dover is another 7 min.That, or there might not have even been any blood on his clothes. Testimony was that the killer wouldn't have gotten much blood on anything but their hands.

[lorettalockhorn]

Everyone says Kevin didn't have time to commit the murder, stage the crime scene, go home change clothes, and be at the Bayou for lunch. Didn't he have clothes in his car that he was taking to Marva's? That would keep him from having to drive back home from Rsvl. to change clothes. I know how long this can take because I only live three miles from him. From Nona's apartment to his house takes 25 to 30 minutes. ( Depends on how many red lights you hit) Then back to Dover is another 7 min.

Not everyone says that he didn't have time; I've driven two different routes between Nona's and the Jones place; one took 21 minutes, the other took 24 minutes. Drive time from Nona's to the Jones station is about eleven minutes. It wouldn't be necessary for KJ to change clothes if the ME's testimony was correct; his clothes would not be necessarily covered in blood. That he had the hand-me-downs already in his vehicle and could have changed if necessary would account for his pristine appearance when grandmother Jones says that she say him around 11:30am.

[oxfordwebster]

Drive time from Nona's to the Jones station is about eleven minutes.This is a very important point that I think most people don't realize. The gas station itself is on highway 7 much further south than what people really consider to be "Dover." It's more of a no-man's land between Russellville and Dover, I think.

[luv2groom]

This is a very important point that I think most people don't realize. The gas station itself is on highway 7 much further south than what people really consider to be "Dover." It's more of a no-man's land between Russellville and Dover, I think.

It is in no-man's land between Russellville and Dover, but pass the Sonic and RCC.

[LurkerNoMore]

That the jury spent so little time considering such contradictory evidence and testimony makes me wonder if they simply could't come to grips with the technological aspects of it and couldn't begin to understand how Kilbourne's testimony didn't actually favor the defense.


The fact that there was contradictory evidence is what led to reasonable doubt. That's really what it comes down to here, and with everything laid on the table, could those jurors be certain, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Kevin Jones did this? They answered no.

Just look at all the questions we still have. Even those who think Kevin is guilty... just look at all the questions.

With each post here, other posters raise more questions. Maybe that's what it was like in the jury room. If so, the not guilty verdict was the right one.

[Hey Paula]

The fact that there was contradictory evidence is what led to reasonable doubt. That's really what it comes down to here, and with everything laid on the table, could those jurors be certain, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Kevin Jones did this? They answered no.

Just look at all the questions we still have. Even those who think Kevin is guilty... just look at all the questions.

With each post here, other posters raise more questions. Maybe that's what it was like in the jury room. If so, the not guilty verdict was the right one.

I can't think of any trials/cases I've followed where all questions about the crime were answered. There will always be unanswered questions remaining because perps are the only ones who know every detail of how they carried out their crimes. A good defense attorney can manipulate the evidence to have it appear contradictory or confusing and are known for introducing red herrings and for their smoke and mirrors deflection tactics.

The evidence against a defendant must be viewed in the aggregate, i.e., its totality. There will always be someone else the Defense can point to, who might be responsible other than his client, either due to their relationship to the victim, having been in close proximity when the crime occurred, etc, etc.

At the end of the day, if Jones killed Nona, the not guilty verdict wasn't right, as justice was not served. Sadly, I believe we haven't heard the last of KJ. Hopefully, it will not result in someone else being killed.

IMO

[LurkerNoMore]

I can't think of any trials/cases I've followed where all questions about the crime were answered.

At the heart of this case, there seems to be nothing but questions. Substantially more than other cases I've followed.

[lorettalockhorn]

The fact that there was contradictory evidence is what led to reasonable doubt. That's really what it comes down to here, and with everything laid on the table, could those jurors be certain, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Kevin Jones did this? They answered no.

Just look at all the questions we still have. Even those who think Kevin is guilty... just look at all the questions.

With each post here, other posters raise more questions. Maybe that's what it was like in the jury room. If so, the not guilty verdict was the right one.

Not saying that the jury owes an explanation, but for the woman who spoke to the media to cite God rather than the evidence strikes me as out of place and self-aggrandizement. That was the gist of my post, that you snipped. If she's going to give a statement, she needs to get real with what people want to know. It's not just here, it's being talked about in The Real World. A lot.

I just heard last night, that KJ was going around Dover after the murder saying that he kill Nona, in some sort of joking manner supposed to deflect his concern about his looming arrest, I guess. And I've heard of two different people who saw KJ roughing Nona up. For these stories and rumors to persist tells me that there are plenty of folks who don't think that justice was served. There will always be questions.

[sololobo]

THV Exclusive: Jury Foreperson Talks About Dirksmeyer Murder Trial


The summer months usually mean relaxation for Kim Willhite, a Spanish teacher at Alma High School. But for her and eleven fellow jurors, this summer will not be one they'll soon forget.

It began on a Sunday night after church for Willhite when she called the Franklin County courthouse to inquire about jury duty. The case? She had no idea.

“My mom said that she thought it was the murder trial,” she said. “I had no idea what I was getting into.”

Willhite's mom was right. She, along with eleven others, faced the unenviable task of determining the fate of 21-year-old Kevin Jones, the man accused of murdering his longtime girlfriend, Nona Dirksmeyer.

“She was a Tech student and a pageant girl; that was the extent of my knowledge,” Willhite said. “And I believe that God had put me there for a reason.”

Willhite says the jurors constantly held themselves in check during the trial, focusing only on facts and removing opinions and personal feelings.

“The biggest thing was praying every night that I would listen and understand,” she said.

“At times there was laughter. One attorney might make a mistake. If one attorney forgot something, the other helped out,” she added. “You really felt like they were both passionate about what they were doing. You can't imagine the amount of evidence we had to go through.”

But in the end, Willhite says the evidence just didn't point to Jones as the killer, so they found him not guilty.

Everything the prosecution introduced, there was reasonable doubt,” she said. “And you knew there were things that weren't there; there were so many holes.”

Legal problems aren't over for Jones. Dirksmeyer's family says they will file a civil suit against him.

http://www.todaysthv.com/news/news.aspx?storyid=49361


This does not sound to me to be some sort of frenzied tent revival/prayer meeting going on in the jury room. It sounds like this jury did everything they could to evaluate the evidence and render a just, un-biased verdict.

[oxfordwebster]

It sounds like this jury did everything they could to evaluate the evidence and render a just, un-biased verdict.If you were able to get that out of that piece, which is most likely just a transcribed version of their TV report, I don't know what to tell you. You have a higher divining skill than I do.

All I saw is blanket assertions, once again. I didn't see this juror explain how they got around the lack of an alibi, the lies to the police, and the print on the murder weapon. Even from reading that, it feels like they put the police on trial and not Kevin Jones.

[TJEddie]

It occurred to me last night that maybe I do have a dog in this fight after all.

Years ago, events outside my control caused a sudden and unexpected turn in my life. The event was significant enough to generate some talk about town. Some of the rumors being floated about "what really happened" drifted back to me.....and boy, were there some doozies! I'm not just talking about vague suspicions here.....I'm talking about intricate, detailed fabrications with absolutely no basis in truth. Suffice it to say, I learned a lot about small town talk first hand.

Fortunately for me, the remedy to my situation was determined by factual evidence considered by people who were neither interested in nor swayed by small town talk. Even now, I am aware of those who question whether the remedy was justified.....based on things they heard, questions they never had answered (because they were none of their business), and imaginings about how they might have acted in a similar situation.

In Kevin's case, I can respect those whose disatisfaction with the verdict is based on their understanding of the factual evidence in this case and how that evidence was handled or interpreted. As for those who seem to suggest that rumor and innuendo have any place at all in determining Kevin's guilt.....well, I would respectfully disagree. I think the justice system backs me up on this.....it's why trials are moved to other counties, and it's why verdicts are rendered by juries rather than by mobs.

[oxfordwebster]

TJEddie - Then how exactly do you feel about KJ's attempt to make York look suspect? What do you think about the defense team mentioning that one kid and calling him a liar in the paper, yet never calling him to the stand? What about all of the other ridiculous rumors that have come out very much in tune with what the defense has been pushing?

Kevin isn't the only poor kid that can be a victim of that.

[sololobo]

If you were able to get that out of that piece, which is most likely just a transcribed version of their TV report, I don't know what to tell you. You have a higher divining skill than I do.

All I saw is blanket assertions, once again. I didn't see this juror explain how they got around the lack of an alibi, the lies to the police, and the print on the murder weapon. Even from reading that, it feels like they put the police on trial and not Kevin Jones.

Here's the link to the video.

http://www.todaysthv.com/video/news/player.aspx?sid=49361&aid=48680

[TJEddie]

TJEddie - Then how exactly do you feel about KJ's attempt to make York look suspect? What do you think about the defense team mentioning that one kid and calling him a liar in the paper, yet never calling him to the stand? What about all of the other ridiculous rumors that have come out very much in tune with what the defense has been pushing?

Kevin isn't the only poor kid that can be a victim of that.

Kevin was the one on trial and the one whose life hung in the balance.

(Not defending the use of rumor and innuendo, but I do draw a distinction between sullying a reputation vs. convicting someone of murder. Rumors can be refuted....murder convictions tend to leave a more serious mark, wouldn't you agree?)

[Hey Paula]

Here's the link to the video.

http://www.todaysthv.com/video/news/player.aspx?sid=49361&aid=48680

She actually said nothing relevant, and made a blanket statement that everything the Pros introduced had reasonable doubt, which I find completely incredulous.

She spoke more about her faith and how well everyone got along, including the Pros and Def helping one another out, than she did about how they arrived at their verdict and the facts about the case.

I thought it was in very poor taste for her to say anyone would have wished for this jury if their daughter was the murdered victim. YIKES!!!!

IMO

[oxfordwebster]

She actually said nothing relevant, and made a blanket statement that everything the Pros introduced had reasonable doubt, which I find completely incredulous.I think this jury worked like this:

"Well, the prosecution said and presented this, and the defense is saying something different. So, instead of actually taking the time to think critically and logically through everything, we'll just call it reasonable doubt. Prayer break!"

Besides, you know these people wanted out of this jury as quickly as possible. No one wanted to be involved in this trial, if the jury selection reports were of any value.

[lorettalockhorn]

THV Exclusive: Jury Foreperson Talks About Dirksmeyer Murder Trial


The summer months usually mean relaxation for Kim Willhite, a Spanish teacher at Alma High School. But for her and eleven fellow jurors, this summer will not be one they'll soon forget.

It began on a Sunday night after church for Willhite when she called the Franklin County courthouse to inquire about jury duty. The case? She had no idea.

“My mom said that she thought it was the murder trial,” she said. “I had no idea what I was getting into.”

Willhite's mom was right. She, along with eleven others, faced the unenviable task of determining the fate of 21-year-old Kevin Jones, the man accused of murdering his longtime girlfriend, Nona Dirksmeyer.

“She was a Tech student and a pageant girl; that was the extent of my knowledge,” Willhite said. “And I believe that God had put me there for a reason.”

Willhite says the jurors constantly held themselves in check during the trial, focusing only on facts and removing opinions and personal feelings.

“The biggest thing was praying every night that I would listen and understand,” she said.

“At times there was laughter. One attorney might make a mistake. If one attorney forgot something, the other helped out,” she added. “You really felt like they were both passionate about what they were doing. You can't imagine the amount of evidence we had to go through.”

But in the end, Willhite says the evidence just didn't point to Jones as the killer, so they found him not guilty.

Everything the prosecution introduced, there was reasonable doubt,” she said. “And you knew there were things that weren't there; there were so many holes.”

Legal problems aren't over for Jones. Dirksmeyer's family says they will file a civil suit against him.

http://www.todaysthv.com/news/news.aspx?storyid=49361


This does not sound to me to be some sort of frenzied tent revival/prayer meeting going on in the jury room. It sounds like this jury did everything they could to evaluate the evidence and render a just, un-biased verdict.

Thanks for posting; hadn't read that. I have to say that with regard to KJ's lack of alibi and the bloody print evidence, the defense had plenty of holes too. She mentions that opinions were put aside; that is exactly what the bloody print evidence was, opinions put forth by respected experts. No doubt the investigation left the jurors as disgusted as it did us.

[oxfordwebster]

Kevin was the one on trial and the one whose life hung in the balance.

(Not defending the use of rumor and innuendo, but I do draw a distinction between sullying a reputation vs. convicting someone of murder. Rumors can be refuted....murder convictions tend to leave a more serious mark, wouldn't you agree?)I'd say the defense trying to make York suspect without any evidence and slandering other people, all in the name of defending their client, goes too far and they shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.

[lorettalockhorn]

It occurred to me last night that maybe I do have a dog in this fight after all.

Years ago, events outside my control caused a sudden and unexpected turn in my life. The event was significant enough to generate some talk about town. Some of the rumors being floated about "what really happened" drifted back to me.....and boy, were there some doozies! I'm not just talking about vague suspicions here.....I'm talking about intricate, detailed fabrications with absolutely no basis in truth. Suffice it to say, I learned a lot about small town talk first hand.

Fortunately for me, the remedy to my situation was determined by factual evidence considered by people who were neither interested in nor swayed by small town talk. Even now, I am aware of those who question whether the remedy was justified.....based on things they heard, questions they never had answered (because they were none of their business), and imaginings about how they might have acted in a similar situation.

In Kevin's case, I can respect those whose disatisfaction with the verdict is based on their understanding of the factual evidence in this case and how that evidence was handled or interpreted. As for those who seem to suggest that rumor and innuendo have any place at all in determining Kevin's guilt.....well, I would respectfully disagree. I think the justice system backs me up on this.....it's why trials are moved to other counties, and it's why verdicts are rendered by juries rather than by mobs.

Good post. I for one don't think that rumor or innuendo should or did have any part of this verdict; I, personally cited them as evidence (for lack of a better word), that people are not happy with the verdict and have questions about how the jury could have possibly come back with a not guilty finding.

[lorettalockhorn]

TJEddie - Then how exactly do you feel about KJ's attempt to make York look suspect? What do you think about the defense team mentioning that one kid and calling him a liar in the paper, yet never calling him to the stand? What about all of the other ridiculous rumors that have come out very much in tune with what the defense has been pushing?

Kevin isn't the only poor kid that can be a victim of that.

Jeremy Martin was publicly slandered/libeled by the defense and then was never allowed an opportunity to address the fact. Talk about irresponsible.

[Hey Paula]

I think this jury worked like this:

"Well, the prosecution said and presented this, and the defense is saying something different. So, instead of actually taking the time to think critically and logically through everything, we'll just call it reasonable doubt. Prayer break!"

Besides, you know these people wanted out of this jury as quickly as possible. No one wanted to be involved in this trial, if the jury selection reports were of any value.

I agree with you and also about the Def slandering York, who wasn't even on trial and didn't get a chance to defend himself. Since it appears this jury bought what the Def said, they might believe York is guilty, while refusing to believe Jones was. After all, someone killed Nona, if not KJ.

York should sue too.

IMO

[lorettalockhorn]

She actually said nothing relevant, and made a blanket statement that everything the Pros introduced had reasonable doubt, which I find completely incredulous.

She spoke more about her faith and how well everyone got along, including the Pros and Def helping one another out, than she did about how they arrived at their verdict and the facts about the case.

I thought it was in very poor taste for her to say anyone would have wished for this jury if their daughter was the murdered victim. YIKES!!!!

IMO

I don't think that the jury seriously considered motive and opportunity with regard to KJ. Also don't think that they had an accurate picture of his character with regard to drug and alcohol use and promiscuity.

Of course, since the prosecution puts on its case first; maybe the jury had discouted everything the prosecution introduced before the defense even put on its witnesses.

[TJEddie]

Jeremy Martin was publicly slandered/libeled by the defense and then was never allowed an opportunity to address the fact. Talk about irresponsible.

As I understand it, slander and libel are false defamations that would negatively affect a person's character, etc. Has any proof come forth that anything said about other suspects is an utter falsehood? Just curious....I really haven't been keeping up with that aspect.

[oxfordwebster]

As I understand it, slander and libel are false defamations that would negatively affect a person's character, etc. Has any proof come forth that anything said about other suspects is an utter falsehood? Just curious....I really haven't been keeping up with that aspect.How could it? Everyone was under a gag order, so it's not like the kid could defend himself when the article came out, when it would have been the most important.

Not only that, the statement was something like "lied to the police" which is pretty broad and damning. I know they mentioned it in multiple articles before the trial.

[lorettalockhorn]

As I understand it, slander and libel are false defamations that would negatively affect a person's character, etc. Has any proof come forth that anything said about other suspects is an utter falsehood? Just curious....I really haven't been keeping up with that aspect.

No. He was a witness. He couldn't speak. Maybe what the defense alleged about him, that he lied about his relationship with Nona, is one of the things that The Courier will address in its "aim to find the missing pieces to this puzzle". Especially since they are one of the media outlets that published the defense's allegations, (probably believing like many of us that they would be addressed on the witness stand).

[TJEddie]

So those of you who are arguing "slander/libel" are just assuming the statements are false?

[lorettalockhorn]

Today's Courier segment "Word on the Street" focuses on this week's question: "What city department do you thihk needs the most improvement and why?

Three out of four respondents (we don't know how many people were asked), named RPD.

Bryon Flood, Russellville: "The police department. I think the way that they handled the investigation of [Kevin] Jones [shows] that they could have done a better job and made a more solid case."

Marlene Looper, Russellville: "It seems that the Russellville Police Department needs the most improvement. They either need better qualified people or at least better training and procedures so that their investigations, like on the [Nona] Dirksmeyer murder, are more precise."

Natille Swoop, Russellville: "The police department needs the most improvement. They really screwed up the thing with Kevin Jones."

(I can't help but wonder what The Courier expected the answers to be to that question. Wonder what the answers would have been any other week?)

[lorettalockhorn]

So those of you who are arguing "slander/libel" are just assuming the statements are false?

Pretty much, until he has a chance to refute them, as many expected he would have had the chance to do at trial.

I can't imagine why the defense would go so far as to publicly call someone a liar and then not expose those lies. I guess since York was tried and convicted without being on trial, Martin wasn't necessary. Irresponsible.

Unless I post a link or a quote, you can pretty well assume that I am assuming or expressing my opinion. It is generally acceptable posting procedure. I believe that somewhere on this board is a thread that does indicate that in order to soothe things in the heat of "battle" or debate that posters might post IMO or JMO to iterate that.

[TJEddie]

Pretty much, until he has a chance to refute them, as many expected he would have had the chance to do at trial.

I can't imagine why the defense would go so far as to publicly call someone a liar and then not expose those lies. I guess since York was tried and convicted without being on trial, Martin wasn't necessary. Irresponsible.

Unless I post a link or a quote, you can pretty well assume that I am assuming or expressing my opinion. It is generally acceptable posting procedure. I believe that somewhere on this board is a thread that does indicate that in order to soothe things in the heat of "battle" or debate that posters might post IMO or JMO to iterate that.

No problem. I wasn't challenging your use of assumption.....I think we all use it. I was just trying to get clarification on whether the "libel/slander" talk was based on assumption or actual evidence of falsehoods. Your response was helpful.....thanks.

[lorettalockhorn]

No problem. I wasn't challenging your use of assumption.....I think we all use it. I was just trying to get clarification on whether the "libel/slander" talk was based on assumption or actual evidence of falsehoods. Your response was helpful.....thanks.


Thanks for not assuming the worst. Honestly, I cannot imagine how it is responsible for the defense to make such statements to the press without allowing Martin recourse, since he was gagged. I guess being a witness makes you fair game; but shouldn't it be actual testimony that is used to impeach your character?

[partyharty]

At the heart of this case, there seems to be nothing but questions. Substantially more than other cases I've followed.

Unfortunatly this can be directly attributed to the investigation. Most of the time investigations are designed to answer questions. :(

This one answered a few but introduced a lot more. (obviously IMHO)

Everyone that is crying about KJ's guilt, the blame lies with the investigation. If I was on the jury, I cannot say that I would have voted to convict with what was presented.

[oxfordwebster]

Everyone that is crying about KJ's guilt, the blame lies with the investigation. If I was on the jury, I cannot say that I would have voted to convict with what was presented.Great! Maybe you can be someone who can answer some of my criticisms then.

[lorettalockhorn]

Unfortunatly this can be directly attributed to the investigation. Most of the time investigations are designed to answer questions. :(

This one answered a few but introduced a lot more. (obviously IMHO)

Everyone that is crying about KJ's guilt, the blame lies with the investigation. If I was on the jury, I cannot say that I would have voted to convict with what was presented.


You don't think it's possible to have criticisms of the investigation and still believe that KJ is the perp?

[partyharty]

You don't think it's possible to have criticisms of the investigation and still believe that KJ is the perp?


I didn't say that at all. I believe that if the prosecution had been able to put on a convincing case, then KJ would have been convicted. However in regards to this case the investigation left too many questions unanswered. I just stated that I could not convict with what I have read about this case.

Remember in this case the level the prosecution is trying to reach is "beyond reasonable doubt". With this investigation the defense team was able to spin what the prosecution had into reasonable doubt.

With a tighter investigation I believe that it would have been a bit more difficult (even impossible) for the defense team.

[partyharty]

Great! Maybe you can be someone who can answer some of my criticisms then.

I doubt that I can do any better than the others who have tried. Bottom line (from what I have read on this thread) is that you are putting everything into his alibi and the bloody palm print.

As for his alibi I have tried to remember what I did 2 weeks ago. I wrote it all down (this is in my own time, not being interrogated, and under "normal" levels of stress). I was missing gaps in my timeline (some gaps were even an hour or so long). KJ was forced to come up with a time line (under stress, while being interrogated, etc) and was able to come up with the better part of the day.

As for the handprint, you have two witnesses (one for the prosecution and one for the defense) which have contridicting opinions. Although this happens in all cases (at least the ones where the defense team is well paid/motivated). The jury believed the defense for whatever reason. I was not in the courtroom so I cannot tell you how believable each witness was, I can only base my observation on the result (the not guilty).

Did KJ do it? I have no idea. I do know the jury found him "not guilty" and that is good enough for me. If he did do it and "got away with murder" then I have to believe that it will catch up to him in the end (as another poster has stated). That level of contempt for others will come out and bite him. I can only state what I would have voted based on what I have seen/heard.

The system is not perfect but it's one of the best in the world.

[oxfordwebster]

As for the handprint, you have two witnesses (one for the prosecution and one for the defense) which have contridicting opinions. Although this happens in all cases (at least the ones where the defense team is well paid/motivated). The jury believed the defense for whatever reason. I was not in the courtroom so I cannot tell you how believable each witness was, I can only base my observation on the result (the not guilty).Since you've obviously followed my criticisms, could you please address this a bit further? I've taken it way past "contradicting" testimony, and my criticisms are backed up by testimony from both camps.

[lorettalockhorn]

I didn't say that at all. I believe that if the prosecution had been able to put on a convincing case, then KJ would have been convicted. However in regards to this case the investigation left too many questions unanswered. I just stated that I could not convict with what I have read about this case.

Remember in this case the level the prosecution is trying to reach is "beyond reasonable doubt". With this investigation the defense team was able to spin what the prosecution had into reasonable doubt.

With a tighter investigation I believe that it would have been a bit more difficult (even impossible) for the defense team.

I was convinced by the prosecution's case. Motive, no alibi and a palm print in unclotted blood on the bulb led me to believe that KJ did it. Add that to some bizarre behavior and lies to LE and I'm still convinced.

[lorettalockhorn]

I doubt that I can do any better than the others who have tried. Bottom line (from what I have read on this thread) is that you are putting everything into his alibi and the bloody palm print.

As for his alibi I have tried to remember what I did 2 weeks ago. I wrote it all down (this is in my own time, not being interrogated, and under "normal" levels of stress). I was missing gaps in my timeline (some gaps were even an hour or so long). KJ was forced to come up with a time line (under stress, while being interrogated, etc) and was able to come up with the better part of the day.

As for the handprint, you have two witnesses (one for the prosecution and one for the defense) which have contridicting opinions. Although this happens in all cases (at least the ones where the defense team is well paid/motivated). The jury believed the defense for whatever reason. I was not in the courtroom so I cannot tell you how believable each witness was, I can only base my observation on the result (the not guilty).

Did KJ do it? I have no idea. I do know the jury found him "not guilty" and that is good enough for me. If he did do it and "got away with murder" then I have to believe that it will catch up to him in the end (as another poster has stated). That level of contempt for others will come out and bite him. I can only state what I would have voted based on what I have seen/heard.

The system is not perfect but it's one of the best in the world.

Agree with your summary that our judicial system is one of the best in the world.

As far as KJ's alibi being weak; he didn't give it two weeks after the murder; he gave it immediately after the discovery. And was interviewed on three separate occasions; plenty of time to shore up his whereabouts. He lied. And grandmother didn't help. Even if her meeting with him wasn't contrived, he still had opportunity.

[partyharty]

Since you've obviously followed my criticisms, could you please address this a bit further? I've taken it way past "contradicting" testimony, and my criticisms are backed up by testimony from both camps.

Well all I can say is that I will answer your question with a question:

Why did the jury not believe the prosecution's witness?

because in the end that is what happened. They stated (in between all of the religous stuff) that they had reasonable doubt and that is why they didnt convict.

Just FYI I think that the jury forman (forewoman) really did herself a disservice by stating that "god" led me to this decision however we (I?) live smack dab in the bible belt and to be honest I have heard other juries come out with pretty much the same thing. These are his "peers" who judged him (and if I ever got into trouble they would probably be the "peers" who would judge me).

I would have much rather heard them come out with a prewritten statement stating that they went through all of the evidense and this is where it led them (and thats it).

But that is my opinion and its worth what you pay for it :D

[doverite]

Agree with your summary that our judicial system is one of the best in the world.

As far as KJ's alibi being weak; he didn't give it two weeks after the murder; he gave it immediately after the discovery. And was interviewed on three separate occasions; plenty of time to shore up his whereabouts. He lied. And grandmother didn't help. Even if her meeting with him wasn't contrived, he still had opportunity.

In some people's mail boxes his family put notes asking if anyone had seen him at home "his car" from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00. If his grandma was hadn't seen him wouldn't they have asked for a different time line.

[TJEddie]

If I was on the jury, I cannot say that I would have voted to convict with what was presented.

Well, everyone here knows by now that I agree. Much has been said about the conflicting testimony on the bloody handprint, but in my mind, the case was weak in another area as well.

I know that Kevin's "completely normal" behavior throughout the afternoon of the 15th has been written off by some as sociopathy, but I think that's a little simplistic for this case. Timelines show that within an hour of this "unplanned crime of passion", he would have been having lunch with a friend at a local restaurant full of people he knew. An hour after that, he was conversing via computer with one of his college professors. Still later, he was working at the family service station, joking with coworkers and customers as usual. To my knowledge, not one of them reported anything at all unusual about his behavior or demeanor.

In my mind, it's a stretch to believe that a 19 y/o with no known history of violence could pull that off.....particularly with no evidence of prior sociopathic behavior being presented. Where was the supporting evidence of Kevin having personality characteristics and behavior patterns consistent with this type of behavior?

[partyharty]

Agree with your summary that our judicial system is one of the best in the world.

As far as KJ's alibi being weak; he didn't give it two weeks after the murder; he gave it immediately after the discovery. And was interviewed on three separate occasions; plenty of time to shore up his whereabouts. He lied. And grandmother didn't help. Even if her meeting with him wasn't contrived, he still had opportunity.


True, but he was being interrogated and beyond stressed (regardless if he did it or not). That may make it a bit crazy to remember also. As for the three different interrogations, if he changes his story then it would look even worse.

Ahh the grandma, I have gotta agree, it was convenient that she saw him (but does that really change the case in any way, she saw him at 11:30 which is probably after the deed was done so her testimony really does not help him). So the meeting being "contrived" or not is really not important (am I wrong here in thinking that it does not help the case either way?)

I am not saying he didnt have oppertunity, however he is not the only one with oppertunity.

As for his lying. Lying does not equal murder (even in a murder investigation), all it does is add up to character (and that only goes so far).

[doverite]

In my mind, it's a stretch to believe that a 19 y/o with no known history of violence could pull that off.....particularly with no evidence of prior sociopathic behavior being presented. Where was the supporting evidence of Kevin having personality characteristics and behavior patterns consistent with this type of behavior?[/QUOTE]


I know that Kevin had a temper when he was younger. I have seen it when he was 12 he would get mad playing baseball when he made an error. Not just throwing his glove or bat down but he would hit the dug out wall. I never really heard or saw anything as he grew older. But sometimes drugs can make you do things you wouldn't normally do. Several people from dover and rsvl still think Bubba Turner had something to do with this. I saw his name earlier in the thread.

[partyharty]

In my mind, it's a stretch to believe that a 19 y/o with no known history of violence could pull that off.....particularly with no evidence of prior sociopathic behavior being presented. Where was the supporting evidence of Kevin having personality characteristics and behavior patterns consistent with this type of behavior?

That is a really good point (and one I have put some thought into as well). Did either side put up witnesses testifying about what patterns he would have been displaying if he had anti-social disorder (or a mental illness)? I dont recall any but then again I wasnt there.

[lorettalockhorn]

Well all I can say is that I will answer your question with a question:

Why did the jury not believe the prosecution's witness?

because in the end that is what happened. They stated (in between all of the religous stuff) that they had reasonable doubt and that is why they didnt convict.

Just FYI I think that the jury forman (forewoman) really did herself a disservice by stating that "god" led me to this decision however we (I?) live smack dab in the bible belt and to be honest I have heard other juries come out with pretty much the same thing. These are his "peers" who judged him (and if I ever got into trouble they would probably be the "peers" who would judge me).

I would have much rather heard them come out with a prewritten statement stating that they went through all of the evidense and this is where it led them (and thats it).

But that is my opinion and its worth what you pay for it :D

That God reference was offputting along with the rest of her statement that Sololobo linked for us.

[lorettalockhorn]

In some people's mail boxes his family put notes asking if anyone had seen him at home "his car" from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00. If his grandma was hadn't seen him wouldn't they have asked for a different time line.

In people's mailboxes? Really?

Anyway, wonder why they didn't just ask if anyone had seen him at any time, period and to contact them.

[TJEddie]

Several people from dover and rsvl still think Bubba Turner had something to do with this.

Oh boy....fresh meat!!

Hahahaha! Just kidding......

[partyharty]

I know that Kevin had a temper when he was younger. I have seen it when he was 12 he would get mad playing baseball when he made an error. Not just throwing his glove or bat down but he would hit the dug out wall. I never really heard or saw anything as he grew older. But sometimes drugs can make you do things you wouldn't normally do. Several people from dover and rsvl still think Bubba Turner had something to do with this. I saw his name earlier in the thread.

Has it been shown that he is on drugs? Which ones? The reason I ask is that some set people off and some mellow people out (uppers and downers). Either would be a bad thing however I would think that it would be brought up in trial if there was evidense to support this. I live in London (and go to ATU) however I have no idea who these people are (past what I have read about them).

Regarding hitting the dugout wall. I have known many who did that (or would slam down their helmet, etc). I am not sure that would go towards violent behavior (now if you told me he hit a teamate it would be a bit different). In my mind hitting walls, dugouts, etc is venting frustration and it does not (on its own) necessarly mean the person has violent tendencies towards other people.

Who is Bubba Turner? (this name is new to me).

[lorettalockhorn]

True, but he was being interrogated and beyond stressed (regardless if he did it or not). That may make it a bit crazy to remember also. As for the three different interrogations, if he changes his story then it would look even worse.

Ahh the grandma, I have gotta agree, it was convenient that she saw him (but does that really change the case in any way, she saw him at 11:30 which is probably after the deed was done so her testimony really does not help him). So the meeting being "contrived" or not is really not important (am I wrong here in thinking that it does not help the case either way?)

I am not saying he didnt have oppertunity, however he is not the only one with oppertunity.

As for his lying. Lying does not equal murder (even in a murder investigation), all it does is add up to character (and that only goes so far).

I think that he would have sounded more honest and more cooperative if he hadn't left his lies unsubstantiated. YEah, thousands of people had opportunity. But he's the one with the motive who left behind evidence. ITA with your statement that the lies go to character, not proof that he's a murderer.

[lorettalockhorn]

In my mind, it's a stretch to believe that a 19 y/o with no known history of violence could pull that off.....particularly with no evidence of prior sociopathic behavior being presented. Where was the supporting evidence of Kevin having personality characteristics and behavior patterns consistent with this type of behavior?


I know that Kevin had a temper when he was younger. I have seen it when he was 12 he would get mad playing baseball when he made an error. Not just throwing his glove or bat down but he would hit the dug out wall. I never really heard or saw anything as he grew older. But sometimes drugs can make you do things you wouldn't normally do. Several people from dover and rsvl still think Bubba Turner had something to do with this. I saw his name earlier in the thread.

Maybe no one had honked him off quite as badly before. Bubba's name pops up occasionally as being involved. So does Ryan Whiteside's and other's too.

[partyharty]

In people's mailboxes? Really?

Anyway, wonder why they didn't just ask if anyone had seen him at any time, period and to contact them.

If that was when the police had down that the murder was committed then I would concentrate on that time period as well. However if these were placed in the mailboxes prior to the timeline being established then thats a really good question (unless they already had the rest of his day accounted for).

[TJEddie]

That is a really good point (and one I have put some thought into as well). Did either side put up witnesses testifying about what patterns he would have been displaying if he had anti-social disorder (or a mental illness)? I dont recall any but then again I wasnt there.

To my knowledge, there are no specific known personality traits associated with true "crimes of passion." However, how a person would likely deal with the residual stress, anxiety, fear, guilt, etc. would be indicative of longstanding personality traits and behavior patterns.....and those can be measured. If a psych eval was ordered in this case (and it probably wasn't) I never heard about it.

[nobody]

It seems that with the swabbing of the victim - they might have detected any lubricants that a condom might have. If no foreign substances - same as what is coated on condoms - were found, this might have added to suspicion of "staging".

I'm still reading - so, I may have missed or not covered this point.

[lorettalockhorn]

If that was when the police had down that the murder was committed then I would concentrate on that time period as well. However if these were placed in the mailboxes prior to the timeline being established then thats a really good question (unless they already had the rest of his day accounted for).

I guess by narrowing the timeline, I find it too suggestive/leading.

[oxfordwebster]

I wouldn't be surprised if Kevin could have picked up a violent temper from his father. I think it's okay for me to say that, considering that he's the guy who threw a chair in a police station.

To party--answering my question with a question doesn't cut it. Saying "why didn't the jury believe" doesn't cut it, either. I have specific problems with the jury's interpretation of the evidence that, to this point, have not been answered by anybody.

[lorettalockhorn]

Has it been shown that he is on drugs? Which ones? The reason I ask is that some set people off and some mellow people out (uppers and downers). Either would be a bad thing however I would think that it would be brought up in trial if there was evidense to support this. I live in London (and go to ATU) however I have no idea who these people are (past what I have read about them).

Regarding hitting the dugout wall. I have known many who did that (or would slam down their helmet, etc). I am not sure that would go towards violent behavior (now if you told me he hit a teamate it would be a bit different). In my mind hitting walls, dugouts, etc is venting frustration and it does not (on its own) necessarly mean the person has violent tendencies towards other people.

Who is Bubba Turner? (this name is new to me).

Kevin admitted to using marijuana and Adderall (I guess he had a prescription) to LE on one of the tapes. I believe that the jury didn't see that in the redacted version. Don't remember if his alcohol use was mentioned, but it's pretty generally accepted that he was/is a drinker.

Bubba Turner is the no goodnik son of the former mayor of Russellville; there were rumors that he committed the murder.

[lorettalockhorn]

To my knowledge, there are no specific known personality traits associated with true "crimes of passion." However, how a person would likely deal with the residual stress, anxiety, fear, guilt, etc. would be indicative of longstanding personality traits and behavior patterns.....and those can be measured. If a psych eval was ordered in this case (and it probably wasn't) I never heard about it.


Agree. Not trying to be flippant, but if it was my kid; I would have had him evaluated.

[TJEddie]

Agree. Not trying to be flippant, but if it was my kid; I would have had him evaluated.

If the prosecution was so sure they had the right guy, I'm a bit surprised they didn't have Kevin evaluated by an expert willing to provide testimony that might explain his ability to act completely normal immediately after killing his girlfriend of 5 years. As I said before, I saw that as another weakness in the prosecution's case.

[partyharty]

Agree. Not trying to be flippant, but if it was my kid; I would have had him evaluated.

You would think that either the prosecution or the defense would regardless.

[oxfordwebster]

If the prosecution was so sure they had the right guy, I'm a bit surprised they didn't have Kevin evaluated by an expert willing to provide testimony that might explain his ability to act completely normal immediately after killing his girlfriend of 5 years. As I said before, I saw that as another weakness in the prosecution's case.Could they even do that? You're talking about a psychology level, and I don't think they could force him to be examined like that.

Maybe they could, I don't know. I'd be interested.

[partyharty]

If the prosecution was so sure they had the right guy, I'm a bit surprised they didn't have Kevin evaluated by an expert willing to provide testimony that might explain his ability to act completely normal immediately after killing his girlfriend of 5 years. As I said before, I saw that as another weakness in the prosecution's case.

+1:) :) :)

[partyharty]

Could they even do that? You're talking about a psychology level, and I don't think they could force him to be examined like that.

Maybe they could, I don't know. I'd be interested.

I believe that if the prosecution brought it up they could get a court to order it.

I know they can if he was to plead temp insanity (or if the defendants sanity is in question), not sure if someone pleads (as in this case) not guilty (or sanity is not doubted).

The bigger question is would the defense have allowed it without objection (think about being a defense lawyer and finding out your client has tendencies which are damaging to your case, the best bet would be that your client is ok (no big deal) the worst case is that your client could do it and not feel remorse (which could destroy your case). For the defense they could gain little but loose big if it was allowed (so I can see why they would get the objection on record).

[lorettalockhorn]

You would think that either the prosecution or the defense would regardless.

We don't know that they didn't. And if the defense or the parents did, just for their own edification, I wouldn't expect to find out. Don't know if the prosecution would be able to compel an evaluation or if they would want one.

Sorry ox, didn't see your post up above.

[upallnight]

I think there would have been cat hairs and carpet fibers, etc in the blood - if touched in this order.


Oh my gosh! This is a good point!

[hawgustusgloop]

Being responsible by having a will, using attorneys at proper times such as business or real estate transactions-that is one thing I have down. But for a 19 year old college boy being asked to talk to police about another college student- showing up with an attorney is supect. He is the only college student who did. Jones was locked in a room with police being interviewed for 4 hours and only asked for Nona's mom or his mom.

Wasn't it at least rumored that Chelsea had an attorney with her for questioning as well? Does anyone know for sure either way?

[hawgustusgloop]

I've heard them and asked around a bit. The police did not follow anything up on Whiteside so I don't know.

How do you know for sure if the police followed anything up on Whiteside or not?

[hawgustusgloop]

For all those here pre-gag order (FDinLaw, oxford, et al), I have one thing to say: I told you so!!!

Hello again, gentilben! If you happen to see birdie1 or LewisM on the golf course, tell 'em to drop us a line, too!

[lorettalockhorn]

Wasn't it at least rumored that Chelsea had an attorney with her for questioning as well? Does anyone know for sure either way?

I believe that it was posted that she did. I would have insisted that my nineteen year old have an attorney present.

Can anyone verify that people are actually locked into an interview/interrogation room?

[lorettalockhorn]

Oh my gosh! This is a good point!

It is. The hair that was examined by the crime lab turned out to be either Nona's or pet hair.

[hawgustusgloop]

I believe that it was posted that she did. I would have insisted that my nineteen year old have an attorney present.

Can anyone verify that people are actually locked into an interview/interrogation room?

I can't verify that either way, but if someone was just there for questioning, not under arrest, and free to leave at any time, wouldn't that be grounds for a lawsuit for false imprisonment?

[TJEddie]

Could they even do that? You're talking about a psychology level, and I don't think they could force him to be examined like that.

Maybe they could, I don't know. I'd be interested.

I don't know, oxford.....I've been looking and I can't find anything on it. I'll let you know if I find anything.

[lorettalockhorn]

I believe that it was posted that she did. I would have insisted that my nineteen year old have an attorney present.

Can anyone verify that people are actually locked into an interview/interrogation room?

I can't verify that either way, but if someone was just there for questioning, not under arrest, and free to leave at any time, wouldn't that be grounds for a lawsuit for false imprisonment?


And against the fire code??

[TJEddie]

I believe that it was posted that she did. I would have insisted that my nineteen year old have an attorney present.

Can anyone verify that people are actually locked into an interview/interrogation room?

I can't verify that either way, but if someone was just there for questioning, not under arrest, and free to leave at any time, wouldn't that be grounds for a lawsuit for false imprisonment?

I believe christina answered that last night, based on Kevin's interview tape which was shown in court. She said at one point when left alone, Kevin got up and tried the door....apparently it wouldn't open, so he knocked on it.

I'm not sure about the legality of it.

[nobody]

It is. The hair that was examined by the crime lab turned out to be either Nona's or pet hair.

One of Nona's neighbors had asked her about a dead cat - that week. If it was not her cat that died - would it have been drawn to the blood, like most animals? Hair would have stuck to her like crazy! Maybe it was an "outside" cat. I also do not remember it in any police reports - except for the hair.

Suspicion draws me to think the killer might have not liked cats either.

[oxfordwebster]

[QUOTE=hawgustusgloop;8919971]

I believe christina answered that last night, based on Kevin's interview tape which was shown in court. She said at one point when left alone, Kevin got up and tried the door....apparently it wouldn't open, so he knocked on it.

I'm not sure about the legality of it.Something tells me that if it was that big of a deal, one of his three expensive lawyers would have made an incredible fuss about it.

[jonikay]

Kevin, during his interrogation, stated that Nona had 3 cats and the little one was scared by all the people that came in after discovery. She had 3 inside cats, according to him.

[lorettalockhorn]

[QUOTE=hawgustusgloop;8919971]

I believe christina answered that last night, based on Kevin's interview tape which was shown in court. She said at one point when left alone, Kevin got up and tried the door....apparently it wouldn't open, so he knocked on it.

I'm not sure about the legality of it.

Thanks, Eddie. I either missed the post or didn't read that section. That doesn't seem right or legal for several reasons.

LOL I thought that Eddie said that!!! Where's that freaked out smiley?

[partyharty]

To party--answering my question with a question doesn't cut it. Saying "why didn't the jury believe" doesn't cut it, either. I have specific problems with the jury's interpretation of the evidence that, to this point, have not been answered by anybody.

Unfortunatly there is no way to answer your specific problems with the jury's interpretation. They have not offered how they interpretated the evidence.
The only ones who can answer those questions are the jury (and it looks like they are not going to elaborate past the statements they have made).

I asked the question the way I did to get you to try and think it through. Why did the jury believe what they did? I am not sure but I can guess that the defense was able refute the testimony offered up by the prosecution. There were too many questions left unanswered (and some are pretty good questions that if answered could have swayed the jury either way). Remember it was not up to the defense to prove innocence, it was up to the prosecuter to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KJ did it.

Your basically asking questions that someone who sat on the jury would have to answer as I do not have all of the information they were privy to (such as cellphone records and what not).

[upallnight]

You will have to pardon my skepticism, but Christina cites an officer who apparently wore no name tag and is now working elsewhere (how does she know that if she doesn't know his name?), as the one who told her that York had an attorney present for questioning and/or court. She also is being contradicted by jonikay who was present in court with regard to her report that JH testified that he had a sexual union with Nona in a music room at Tech. I honestly would like to see those issues addressed before I consider whether or not attorneys were actually talking about York and/or his taking the fifth or not. Let alone why. (I guess the obvious assumption would be that his attorney might have felt that he was to be railroaded on the witness stand.)


Jonikay is correct, I was there and heard his testimony. Within about 10 minutes upon his arrival to Nona's apartment, they started having sex. The only other thing he said was that he and Nona had oral sex once. He did not say that the oral sex took place in a music room. Kevins attorney had to drag the oral sex testimony out of him. I felt it was cruel to Nona's loved ones there and proved nothing.

[nobody]

Both doors were supposedly locked, following the murder. Can you lock a sliding door from the outside? My point is that the killer would have left through the front door. Whiteside would have ruined these prints (if any) when he opened the door to Mrs. Jones. This point does not lead anywhere, but it might help understand some of the scene.

One other note - who locks their doors in the middle of the day? Are we sure that the killer needed a key? Maybe It is a far reach - but I might suggest the attacker had come in the apartment and then hid - attacking her from behind?

[jonikay]

Jonikay is correct, I was there and heard his testimony. Within about 10 minutes upon his arrival to Nona's apartment, they started having sex. The only other thing he said was that he and Nona had oral sex once. He did not say that the oral sex took place in a music room. Kevins attorney had to drag the oral sex testimony out of him. I felt it was cruel to Nona's loved ones there and proved nothing.
Thanks for the confirmation, upallnight. I wondered if I had just missed that part of his testimony or didn't hear it. I was embarrassed for Harris, to say the least.

[lorettalockhorn]

Jonikay is correct, I was there and heard his testimony. Within about 10 minutes upon his arrival to Nona's apartment, they started having sex. The only other thing he said was that he and Nona had oral sex once. He did not say that the oral sex took place in a music room. Kevins attorney had to drag the oral sex testimony out of him. I felt it was cruel to Nona's loved ones there and proved nothing.

It seems particularly cruel in that Nona was portrayed as having been unfaithful, whereas there was no direct testimony to assert that KJ was equally untrue to his "very, very exclusive" relationship.

Thanks for letting us know.

[lorettalockhorn]

Both doors were supposedly locked, following the murder. Can you lock a sliding door from the outside? My point is that the killer would have left through the front door. Whiteside would have ruined these prints (if any) when he opened the door to Mrs. Jones. This point does not lead anywhere, but it might help understand some of the scene.

One other note - who locks their doors in the middle of the day? Are we sure that the killer needed a key? Maybe It is a far reach - but I might suggest the attacker had come in the apartment and then hid - attacking her from behind?

At some point in the thread is some discussion about whether or not the door could be locked or latched and then closed. I guess maybe it depends on the type of door. The PCS remarks that the locked door could be opened from outside, but doesn't state whether officers tried locking and then closing it. Maybe someone heard testimony. If not possible, I wonder if that's why Carol Dipert is insistent that Kevin having a key is so important to her belief that he is the perp.

[nobody]

Post # 839 talks about the Keys. - Page 21

[upallnight]

The fact that there was contradictory evidence is what led to reasonable doubt. That's really what it comes down to here, and with everything laid on the table, could those jurors be certain, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Kevin Jones did this? They answered no.

Just look at all the questions we still have. Even those who think Kevin is guilty... just look at all the questions.

With each post here, other posters raise more questions. Maybe that's what it was like in the jury room. If so, the not guilty verdict was the right one.

Could be but at the same time maybe the jury was not smart enough to put all the evidence they had together if he did actually kill Nona.
I think there are many questions, even for those who thought Kevin was not the killer. Those who pull jury duty do not do it for a living. They are not trained in criminal law or criminal defense law. Seems like it would take a lot of hard work to come up with a verdict in a murder case like this. That evidence is everything, 7 days of trial, a few hours for the verdict and that's not counting lunch (even if it was a working lunch) and the part of the video of Kevin that they watched again. The evidence was directed toward KJ. The defense tried to direct it in so many different directions other than KJ. They are professionals, that was their job. They was paid well for it I'm sure. If KJ killed Nona or not, seems the jury was asking the wrong questions as for as wanting to know more about the Jarred guy. If Gibbons has evidence on anyone else I think he would have went for charges on them, I do believe they want the killer to be brought to justice. I do think it was hard for the jury not being trained in a professional way to have to do what they had to do. Someone killed Nona, they went with the evidence they had. Whoever did it will meet their maker one day, that is when God will be the judge and the jury. I hope Kevin did not do it, I sure hope he did not with the verdict. I hope one day who ever the killer is will be brought to justice. I just hope it will not be after another life is taken and I hope Nona's family can see this creep brought to justice here on earth. Until then, and if it happens, the killer will meet his maker and no matter who this person is in his/her daily life no one gets away with murder forever.

[nobody]

A neighbor reported that she threw her keys at the "door banging" man - that drove off in her car. What is my point? She might not have had the tight security over her house keys that we have suggested. This person might not have had access to her apartment that day - but usually the house and car keys are attached. Just speculation...

[lorettalockhorn]

A neighbor reported that she threw her keys at the "door banging" man - that drove off in her car. What is my point? She might not have had the tight security over her house keys that we have suggested. This person might not have had access to her apartment that day - but usually the house and car keys are attached. Just speculation...

hmmm So Door Banging Man could have driven down to Leonard's and had her house key copied. Interesting thought.

[upallnight]

It is. The hair that was examined by the crime lab turned out to be either Nona's or pet hair.

Based on the report of a hand print in blood on the carpet by Non'a's body and defense said he got the blood on the bulb when he found her dead, if some fibers/cat hair came from this time frame it may be on the bulb, if none on the bulb in the blood, more likely the print was made when Nona was being killed not from him getting off the body etc.

[upallnight]

Thanks for the confirmation, upallnight. I wondered if I had just missed that part of his testimony or didn't hear it. I was embarrassed for Harris, to say the least.

Your welcome and you listened and took notes well from what I see on your posts.

[upallnight]

It seems particularly cruel in that Nona was portrayed as having been unfaithful, whereas there was no direct testimony to assert that KJ was equally untrue to his "very, very exclusive" relationship.

Thanks for letting us know.

Your welcome and I agree.

[upallnight]

Your welcome and I agree.

Goodnight to all, stay safe & God Bless.

[nobody]

Based on the report of a hand print in blood on the carpet by Non'a's body and defense said he got the blood on the bulb when he found her dead, if some fibers/cat hair came from this time frame it may be on the bulb, if none on the bulb in the blood, more likely the print was made when Nona was being killed not from him getting off the body etc.

Here is an article for you to chew on - it has already been hashed out, but I think we should reconsider the initial statements - not what the defense later claimed.
http://www.couriernews.com/archived_story.php?ID=13430&Search=nona%20dirksmeyer

[nobody]

Here is an article for you to chew on - it has already been hashed out, but I think we should reconsider the initial statements - not what the defense later claimed.
http://www.couriernews.com/archived_story.php?ID=13430&Search=nona%20dirksmeyer

"Bloody finger- and palmprints belonging to Jones were reportedly found on the lamp authorities believe to be the murder weapon, according to the statement. Jones later denied touching the lamp at the time he, his mother Janice, and friend Ryan Whiteside discovered Dirksmeyer’s body."

[sololobo]

The prosecution had no provable motive. They could not place Kevin at the scene during the time of the murder. The questionable tacky bloody print proved to be questionable. Kevin did have an alibi but it was not completely verifiable. This is not unusual. It is up to the prosecution to disprove his alibi. They did not. Kevin told no lies important to this case and for the most part these can be attributed to his state of mind at the time. Kevin was not a drug-crazed maniac nor was he a raged-filled alcoholic. The jury had no choice but to aquit. I know this will not sway the belief of many on this board that Kevin is guilty, and you are entitled to your beliefs and I respect them, but it is reality and a good jury bases their verdict on reality, not un-provable accusations.

David Gibbons is one of the best DA's in the state. If Kevin was guilty, IMO, Gibbons would have got a conviction. Our police department is not incompetent as many here think. If Kevin committed this crime, IMO, they would have proved it.

The imagined lies and delusional suspicions prevalent on this board are not evidence to Kevin's guilt, nor or they evidence to the guilt of Jeremy, Trey, Duane, Bubba, and/or whoever else may have been suspected on this board. They are merely IMO's and can not be proven.

[christina]

If the prosecution was so sure they had the right guy, I'm a bit surprised they didn't have Kevin evaluated by an expert willing to provide testimony that might explain his ability to act completely normal immediately after killing his girlfriend of 5 years. As I said before, I saw that as another weakness in the prosecution's case.

Many waited for the FBI profiler to get on the stand for the prosecution. I believe it would have helped their case. The only FBI person was a computer expert. There was also no report from an FBI profiler either. I still wonder why as that was thrown around from the beginning as a reason for focussing on Jones.

[oxfordwebster]

Honestly, I think it's a little fishy that the defense didn't go after Nona more while the prosecution simultaneously didn't go after Jones more. I'm referring to things such as cheating, drugs, etc.

[christina]

Kevin admitted to using marijuana and Adderall (I guess he had a prescription) to LE on one of the tapes. I believe that the jury didn't see that in the redacted version. Don't remember if his alcohol use was mentioned, but it's pretty generally accepted that he was/is a drinker.

Bubba Turner is the no goodnik son of the former mayor of Russellville; there were rumors that he committed the murder.

We were told the tape shown in court was uneditted. The prosecution did not introduce a second tape. Jones admitted to drinking and some drug use on the tape shown. Agin in context- the officer asked him if Nona did drugs or partied, Jones answered definitely no- last time she cam to Fayetteville, he and his friends offered her some and she would not.

The mayor's son was rumored to have dated Nona, he has a known drug problem(arrested at least twice). It was told he left town for Colorado within a day or two of the murder. All of that was quickly dispelled by an editorial in the Courier.

[christina]

How do you know for sure if the police followed anything up on Whiteside or not?

I do not know for sure, I was told this by someone I thought reliable.

[christina]

I believe that it was posted that she did. I would have insisted that my nineteen year old have an attorney present.

Can anyone verify that people are actually locked into an interview/interrogation room?

It is clear on the tape that Jones can not open the door although he tries several times before knocking. I was surprised simply for fire code reasons.

[Hey Paula]

I believe that it was posted that she did. I would have insisted that my nineteen year old have an attorney present.

Can anyone verify that people are actually locked into an interview/interrogation room?

If the interview/interrogation rooms are locked, it wouldn't be surprising. I believe these rooms are also used to question suspects, who have been arrested, and likely lock automatically when the door closes to prevent suspects from escaping. They have an interior window/mirror where LE can view suspects from the outside, yet the suspects cannot see LE.

IMO

[christina]

Could they even do that? You're talking about a psychology level, and I don't think they could force him to be examined like that.

Maybe they could, I don't know. I'd be interested.

Just as they took his fingerprints and dna, I imagine they have the power to request a psych evaluation. But again, the FBI profiler was supposedly confered with but no evidence was presented. That was something I really wanted to hear. I have a great deal of respect for that field.

[christina]

Jonikay is correct, I was there and heard his testimony. Within about 10 minutes upon his arrival to Nona's apartment, they started having sex. The only other thing he said was that he and Nona had oral sex once. He did not say that the oral sex took place in a music room. Kevins attorney had to drag the oral sex testimony out of him. I felt it was cruel to Nona's loved ones there and proved nothing.

So you got the opportunity to enjoy those hard courtroom pews as well!
The lawyer specifically asked the oral sex took place at Nona's apartment and he said no..... (this is where I heard him say the Tech music room). What answer did you hear?

In my opinion the lawyer did not drag it out of him, he did not answer the first question truthfully/completely. The lawyer did his job by asking a follow up question- "I am not wanting to sound like Clinton, but when I ask about sex I am not just asking about intercourse". "Oh, I thought you were, well yes we had sex more than once".
It was uncomfortable for those of us in the courtroom, I can not imagine how it made her mother feel. It was at this point the lawyers agreed not to bring in any more "sex witnesses" I believe.
And yes it did prove something- it proved that more males than just Jones were invited to Nona's apartment. The prosecution made a mistake by putting these guys on the stand. The original intent was to set timeline but it appeared to backfire on them.

[christina]

Both doors were supposedly locked, following the murder. Can you lock a sliding door from the outside? My point is that the killer would have left through the front door. Whiteside would have ruined these prints (if any) when he opened the door to Mrs. Jones. This point does not lead anywhere, but it might help understand some of the scene.

One other note - who locks their doors in the middle of the day? Are we sure that the killer needed a key? Maybe It is a far reach - but I might suggest the attacker had come in the apartment and then hid - attacking her from behind?

I hadn't thought about how the slider got locked after the murder. The stick was taken, it was suggested in court it could have been used in the attack. Which wasy did he leave though. There was blood on the slider blinds but none found near the front door, only the light switch by it. I have assumed the murderer left through the slider.

[oxfordwebster]

And yes it did prove something- it proved that more males than just Jones were invited to Nona's apartment.Which proves what, exactly? That every guy invited to her apartment in the past year is reasonable doubt? Every person she had any kind of sexual contact with is a suspect?

Hell, we might as well start claiming that Kevin's partner's he cheated on his supposed fiancee with are suspects, too.

[oxfordwebster]

I hadn't thought about how the slider got locked after the murder. The stick was taken, it was suggested in court it could have been used in the attack. Which wasy did he leave though. There was blood on the slider blinds but none found near the front door, only the light switch by it. I have assumed the murderer left through the slider.She was positioned and the blinds opened so she could be seen through the sliding glass door. That's why there was blood on the blinds. After he finished arranging everything, he turned the light off by the door thinking he was done, but realized he had blood on his hands. He washed his hands, and he left through the front door, because if he would have done anything else it would have looked suspicious. That's how the slider was still locked.

An alternative theory for the light switch is that he flicked it off (or possibly on) right after the murder while he did his business. I could see turning it off right after, because he might have missed his palm print if it was darker.

[christina]

It seems particularly cruel in that Nona was portrayed as having been unfaithful, whereas there was no direct testimony to assert that KJ was equally untrue to his "very, very exclusive" relationship.

Thanks for letting us know.


He directly said it himself on the tape.

[lorettalockhorn]

If the interview/interrogation rooms are locked, it wouldn't be surprising. I believe these rooms are also used to question suspects, who have been arrested, and likely lock automatically when the door closes to prevent suspects from escaping. They have an interior window/mirror where LE can view suspects from the outside, yet the suspects cannot see LE.

IMO

I just don't know about locking a suspect into an interrogation room; seems like a violation of rights. If the suspect is not under arrest, he has the right to leave at any time. If the suspect is actually under arrest, he can be handcuffed, manacled, or whatever prevent his escape, but not potentially endangering him.

(Today's NYT XWord puzzle has this clue at 40 Across; Criticism to pick. The answer is; nit. I immediately thought about some of what we've discussed here!)

[christina]

Could be but at the same time maybe the jury was not smart enough to put all the evidence they had together if he did actually kill Nona.
I think there are many questions, even for those who thought Kevin was not the killer. Those who pull jury duty do not do it for a living. They are not trained in criminal law or criminal defense law. Seems like it would take a lot of hard work to come up with a verdict in a murder case like this. That evidence is everything, 7 days of trial, a few hours for the verdict and that's not counting lunch (even if it was a working lunch) and the part of the video of Kevin that they watched again. The evidence was directed toward KJ. The defense tried to direct it in so many different directions other than KJ. They are professionals, that was their job. They was paid well for it I'm sure. If KJ killed Nona or not, seems the jury was asking the wrong questions as for as wanting to know more about the Jarred guy. If Gibbons has evidence on anyone else I think he would have went for charges on them, I do believe they want the killer to be brought to justice. I do think it was hard for the jury not being trained in a professional way to have to do what they had to do. Someone killed Nona, they went with the evidence they had. Whoever did it will meet their maker one day, that is when God will be the judge and the jury. I hope Kevin did not do it, I sure hope he did not with the verdict. I hope one day who ever the killer is will be brought to justice. I just hope it will not be after another life is taken and I hope Nona's family can see this creep brought to justice here on earth. Until then, and if it happens, the killer will meet his maker and no matter who this person is in his/her daily life no one gets away with murder forever.

There was an out cry for months to bring charges against someone in this case. With virtually no evidence in general, I think they went with the only piece of evidence they had- the print on the light bulb. After that, I believe they worked to make it fit.

[christina]

A neighbor reported that she threw her keys at the "door banging" man - that drove off in her car. What is my point? She might not have had the tight security over her house keys that we have suggested. This person might not have had access to her apartment that day - but usually the house and car keys are attached. Just speculation...

Hadn't thought about that.

[lorettalockhorn]

He directly said it himself on the tape.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't consider the tape to be direct testimony since there was no cross examination of his statement. What I refer to is the fact that there was no direct testimony from any of KJ's partner(s) that could have been questioned to determine the nature of the relationship.

[christina]

Honestly, I think it's a little fishy that the defense didn't go after Nona more while the prosecution simultaneously didn't go after Jones more. I'm referring to things such as cheating, drugs, etc.

I agree. Was there some deal about theses subjects behind closed doors between the lawyers in this case?
"We know your client is a cheater and smokes pot", "we know your client regularly asked men over to her apartment,".....

[lorettalockhorn]

Which proves what, exactly? That every guy invited to her apartment in the past year is reasonable doubt? Every person she had any kind of sexual contact with is a suspect?

Hell, we might as well start claiming that Kevin's partner's he cheated on his supposed fiancee with are suspects, too.

I did that in another post. This crime could have been committed by a female as far as I know. There are plenty of women that are strong enough to have weilded the lamp with the tremendous force necessary to kill Nona, someone who lifts weights for instance. And there are plenty of women who run or job or hike that would have been able to leave the scene going cross country to a car parked offsite.

The condom wrapper could have belonged to one of her other lover(s).

[lorettalockhorn]

I agree. Was there some deal about theses subjects behind closed doors between the lawyers in this case?
"We know your client is a cheater and smokes pot", "we know your client regularly asked men over to her apartment,".....

Regularly? Are you including her study group? I guess they may have met with some regularity. Not sure what constitutes regularly, or if you are inferring that she had sex with every regular visitor to her apartment, or what.

[oxfordwebster]

I agree. Was there some deal about theses subjects behind closed doors between the lawyers in this case?
"We know your client is a cheater and smokes pot", "we know your client regularly asked men over to her apartment,".....Your feelings didn't get hidden with this one at all, did it?

I question if they even had a relationship at this point to begin with. She's with other people, he's with other people, they are split by distance... it was a little convenient for Kevin to pretend like he was going to propose that night.

[christina]

Which proves what, exactly? That every guy invited to her apartment in the past year is reasonable doubt? Every person she had any kind of sexual contact with is a suspect?

Hell, we might as well start claiming that Kevin's partner's he cheated on his supposed fiancee with are suspects, too.

Um buh, you used a swear word!
The point seemed to be that other males had access to her and her apartment. I don't think it mattered what she did with those men.
The prosecution attempted to prove she was very security conscience. My guess is to point out she wouldn't have let "just anyone in", there was no visible sign of forced entry. They were pointing to someone that knew her, specifically Jones.
That idea was dispelled by the witnesses saying they had been to her apartment and the neighbor witnessing the argument.

[christina]

Your welcome and you listened and took notes well from what I see on your posts.

I agree also. The days Jonikay was there, she appeared to do a good job. We have disagreed on the interpretation, but she did take good notes.

[lorettalockhorn]

Your feelings didn't get hidden with this one at all, did it?

I question if they even had a relationship at this point to begin with. She's with other people, he's with other people, they are split by distance... it was a little convenient for Kevin to pretend like he was going to propose that night.

Yeah, I believe that Brent Hunnicutt was the name on a witness list who was identified as a jewelry store employee. I was looking forward to hearing if his testimony might clarify whether or not KJ had been shopping for a ring. Then the defense abruptly rested.

[oxfordwebster]

The point seemed to be that other males had access to her and her apartment. I don't think it mattered what she did with those men.
The prosecution attempted to prove she was very security conscience. My guess is to point out she wouldn't have let "just anyone in", there was no visible sign of forced entry. They were pointing to someone that knew her, specifically Jones.
That idea was dispelled by the witnesses saying they had been to her apartment and the neighbor witnessing the argument.I have a hard time riding your logic train from "she wasn't a loner so other people were in fact allowed contact with her" to "everybody she ever had over had free access to her apartment at all times."

That's a huge logic disconnect, and a bit too much of a stretch for me to buy. You don't just assume everybody who's been to a location could be a suspect or cause reasonable doubt if there's not evidence showing it.

[christina]

She was positioned and the blinds opened so she could be seen through the sliding glass door. That's why there was blood on the blinds. After he finished arranging everything, he turned the light off by the door thinking he was done, but realized he had blood on his hands. He washed his hands, and he left through the front door, because if he would have done anything else it would have looked suspicious. That's how the slider was still locked.

An alternative theory for the light switch is that he flicked it off (or possibly on) right after the murder while he did his business. I could see turning it off right after, because he might have missed his palm print if it was darker.

The light switch also had the kitchen light on it doesn't it? I have wondered why the kitchen light was on. And the only blood in the kitchen was a drip of Nona's blood on the stove.

[oxfordwebster]

Yeah, I believe that Brent Hunnicutt was the name on a witness list who was identified as a jewelry store employee. I was looking forward to hearing if his testimony might clarify whether or not KJ had been shopping for a ring. Then the defense abruptly rested.I question the ethics of naming an employee of a jewelry ring store, which the jury heard, and then never calling him. To me, it seems like that could been used just to plant the idea in their head without having to have the witness testify.

[oxfordwebster]

The light switch also had the kitchen light on it doesn't it? I have wondered why the kitchen light was on. And the only blood in the kitchen was a drip of Nona's blood ont he stove.No idea about the switch.

I don't think it's hard to imagine someone washing blood from their hands and getting a bit on a stove. The killer had to have washed his hands off, or else he used something to open the door for him.

[christina]

Yeah, I believe that Brent Hunnicutt was the name on a witness list who was identified as a jewelry store employee. I was looking forward to hearing if his testimony might clarify whether or not KJ had been shopping for a ring. Then the defense abruptly rested.

I disagree with that characterization. The defense stood up in the courtroom, turned to the jury then to the judge and made a statement they were now resting. The prosecution resting is what was abrupt. They called a few witnesses Monday morning, asked for a break then when we came back from break the judge turned to the jury and said the prosecution had rested and now the defense would begin. It took us aback.

[christina]

I question the ethics of naming an employee of a jewelry ring store, which the jury heard, and then never calling him. To me, it seems like that could been used just to plant the idea in their head without having to have the witness testify.

This tactic was employed by both sides.

[oxfordwebster]

I disagree with that characterization. The defense stood up in the courtroom, turned to the jury then to the judge and made a statement they were now resting. The prosecution resting is what was abrupt. They called a few witnesses Monday morning, asked for a break then when we came back from break the judge turned to the jury and said the prosecution had rested and now the defense would begin. It took us aback.What? Hardly. That goes against everything else I've heard and read. The prosecution took longer than originally expected, if anything. However, everybody else I've had contact with said they were surprised with the defense stopping.

I do expect your interpretations to clash with others', so it's not a huge deal, I guess.

[oxfordwebster]

This tactic was employed by both sides.Give me some examples, then.

[christina]

No idea about the switch.

I don't think it's hard to imagine someone washing blood from their hands and getting a bit on a stove. The killer had to have washed his hands off, or else he used something to open the door for him.

Not if he went out the slider. As we have both said previously, the testimony was that the murderer would not have had much blood on them.

The stove is opposite the sink though, the drop was 4 inches from the floor, right about the bottom drawer of the stove, the place you might get a cake pan.

[christina]

Give me some examples, then.

FBI profiler is a big one.

[oxfordwebster]

The stove is opposite the sink though, the drop was 4 inches from the floor, right about the bottom drawer of the stove, the place you might get a cake pan.Oh, okay. So, somehow, Trey had so much blood on him that it was dripping, yet he left no evidence behind when getting that cake pan, such as a blood from opening the drawer.

Come on, now.

[oxfordwebster]

FBI profiler is a big one.Oh, okay. Please point out that FBI profiler on this witness list (http://couriernews.com/archived_story.php?ID=15313&Search=witness%20list).

If you claim he's missing from the list, I'm going to need his name so I can get secondary verification.

[lorettalockhorn]

I disagree with that characterization. The defense stood up in the courtroom, turned to the jury then to the judge and made a statement they were now resting. The prosecution resting is what was abrupt. They called a few witnesses Monday morning, asked for a break then when we came back from break the judge turned to the jury and said the prosecution had rested and now the defense would begin. It took us aback.

I've seen the word abrupt used by others, it is not just my characterization. There were witnesses that the defense didn't call that were anticipated, such as Jeremy Martin. The defense was quoted in the media as saying that he lied about his relationship with Nona. Believe me, I am not the only one who feels that by not calling him; he has been maligned. The trial was expected to last two weeks; it fell short, in part due to the defense not availing itself of its witnesses.

[optimumprimal78]

Did Hunnicutt have any relationship with Nona? Maybe one of you who are more able to find things out about people can let us know. Obviously they didn't need to call everyone on the list but it would have been nice to hear what the views of some of the people on that list were.

[oxfordwebster]

Did Hunnicutt have any relationship with Nona? Maybe one of you who are more able to find things out about people can let us know.A part of me doubts it, or they wouldn't have explained that he was a jewelry store employee. Take Martin--claiming he lied in a hearing, and then saying he was an "acquaintance" of Nona's when brought up as a witness to be called.

[doverite]

Wondering if anyone else thought it strange that the Sheriff of Pope County, Jay Winters, got up and hugged KJ's mother?
Thoughts?
Kind of makes you wonder why he never spent a day in jail.
I am sure if I was awaiting capital murder trial I would have been in jail.....



Winters and KJ's dad Junior Jones went to school at Dover and graduated together.

[doverite]

The notes in people's mailboxes were left when they were making the timeline. Not after.

[TJEddie]

Many waited for the FBI profiler to get on the stand for the prosecution. I believe it would have helped their case. The only FBI person was a computer expert. There was also no report from an FBI profiler either. I still wonder why as that was thrown around from the beginning as a reason for focussing on Jones.

IMO, the prosecution couldn't include the FBI profiler/behavior expert because they ended up going against his interpretation of the scene. The FBI person (per a news article) specifically cited the condom wrapper as appearing to be a staged piece of evidence.....something that "didn't fit." The prosecution ended up using that condom wrapper as their reason for Kevin's jealous rage.

I agree with what you or someone else has said elsewhere.....it's like they decided Kevin did it and then worked backward to prove it, even to the point of discounting the FBI expert's input.

[oxfordwebster]

IMO, the prosecution couldn't include the FBI profiler/behavior expert because they ended up going against his interpretation of the scene. The FBI person (per a news article) specifically cited the condom wrapper as appearing to be a staged piece of evidence.....something that "didn't fit." The prosecution ended up using that condom wrapper as their reason for Kevin's jealous rage.Which doesn't mean he could have planted it himself. Maybe him finding it is what set him off? What if he found it that night he spent the night, took it, and came back with it to confront her?

I agree with what you or someone else has said elsewhere.....it's like they decided Kevin did it and then worked backward to prove it, even to the point of discounting the FBI expert's input.Yet there were initially six people they were checking that were narrowed down to Kevin.

[TJEddie]

It seems particularly cruel in that Nona was portrayed as having been unfaithful, whereas there was no direct testimony to assert that KJ was equally untrue to his "very, very exclusive" relationship.

Thanks for letting us know.

That would have worked against the prosecution's presentation of motive. The prosecution was basing their motive on Kevin being a jealous lover in what he viewed as a "very, very exclusive" relationship. Watering down that exclusivity by presenting other lovers would have been watering down their motive.

[partyharty]

I have a hard time riding your logic train from "she wasn't a loner so other people were in fact allowed contact with her" to "everybody she ever had over had free access to her apartment at all times."

That's a huge logic disconnect, and a bit too much of a stretch for me to buy. You don't just assume everybody who's been to a location could be a suspect or cause reasonable doubt if there's not evidence showing it.

It is an equally huge logic disconnect that she was only with KJ (and that he was the only one with access to her apartment). The prosecution was trying to put forth that KJ was the ONLY one with oppertunity and so the defense called these witnesses to refute that testimony showing that others had access as well.

[ordanja]

Did Hunnicutt have any relationship with Nona? Maybe one of you who are more able to find things out about people can let us know. Obviously they didn't need to call everyone on the list but it would have been nice to hear what the views of some of the people on that list were.

Hunnicutt went to school with both of them, and he is also "not into girls", so I would say that he didn't have a relationship with her, but maybe a friendship.

[TJEddie]

Which doesn't mean he could have planted it himself. Maybe him finding it is what set him off? What if he found it that night he spent the night, took it, and came back with it to confront her?

Yet there were initially six people they were checking that were narrowed down to Kevin.

Well, Kevin finding it 2 days ago and then bringing it back to confront Nona wouldn't fit with the spontaneous "crime of passion" scenario. I'd have to go back and reread the closing statements article, but I believe the prosecution specifically used that condom wrapper as the thing that Kevin spotted, spinning him into a murderous rage.

As for the 6 original suspects, I haven't studied back that far but I'll take your word for it. It sounds reasonable. That doesn't discount the possibility of LE picking one based on a single piece of evidence and working backward to make a case. Unfortunately, we don't know anything about how the others were eliminated.....nor do we know all there is to know about why they were suspects in the first place.

[oxfordwebster]

It is an equally huge logic disconnect that she was only with KJ (and that he was the only one with access to her apartment). The prosecution was trying to put forth that KJ was the ONLY one with oppertunity and so the defense called these witnesses to refute that testimony showing that others had access as well.It was testified that Nona was extremely security conscious, so these people could not access her apartment unless you are trying to suggest that she handed out copies of her apartment key to everybody that she allowed over.

Kevin had keys to the apartment, which completely renders Nona's security moot. The body was arranged in exactly the way that Kevin attempted to have Whiteside discover, and when that didn't happen, he led everyone directly to what he arranged--a viewing from outside. He still let Whiteside see that one before him.

[lorettalockhorn]

That would have worked against the prosecution's presentation of motive. The prosecution was basing their motive on Kevin being a jealous lover in what he viewed as a "very, very exclusive" relationship. Watering down that exclusivity by presenting other lovers would have been watering down their motive.

While I agree with your logic, it still would have been advantageous after JH testified, for the prosecution to have put on KJ's other partner(s) to water down the effect made by sworn testimony that Nona was unfaithful. Bad call. I'm thinking that there's more to the agreement made during sidebar than we may ever know.

[oxfordwebster]

Well, Kevin finding it 2 days ago and then bringing it back to confront Nona wouldn't fit with the spontaneous "crime of passion" scenario. I'd have to go back and reread the closing statements article, but I believe the prosecution specifically used that condom wrapper as the thing that Kevin spotted, spinning him into a murderous rage.Her response to what she said when he confronted her could have been the moment of passion; or perhaps he did find it that day and then arranged it. Who knows.

As for the 6 original suspects, I haven't studied back that far but I'll take your word for it. It sounds reasonable. That doesn't discount the possibility of LE picking one based on a single piece of evidence and working backward to make a case. Unfortunately, we don't know anything about how the others were eliminated.....nor do we know all there is to know about why they were suspects in the first place.There were six people, and I imagine they were eliminated like how Kevin wasn't--they had alibis and no evidence tying them to the crime. I have a feeling that the majority of these people were only brought into it because people started pointing fingers. Their other suspicious behavior with name-dropping would lead me to think it.

[TJEddie]

It was testified that Nona was extremely security conscious, so these people could not access her apartment unless you are trying to suggest that she handed out copies of her apartment key to everybody that she allowed over.

Kevin had keys to the apartment, which completely renders Nona's security moot. The body was arranged in exactly the way that Kevin attempted to have Whiteside discover, and when that didn't happen, he led everyone directly to what he arranged--a viewing from outside. He still let Whiteside see that one before him.

If I'm not mistaken, there was no evidence whatsoever that Nona's body was arranged....no bloody drag marks on the carpet, etc. I think the crime scene showed that Nona died where she fell.

[ordanja]

I was thinking about the light bulb yesterday and this came to my mind. If Kevin killed her with the lamp, why would he have even touched the bulb?? Wouldn't he hold the lamb by the base and the neck for better control?? Wouldn't the light bulb break or even be hot if it was touched during the murder?? There being blood on his hands could have come from the knife wounds....but it just doesn't sound possible for him to have held the lamp by the bulb. I guess it is possible he might have moved it before he left, but why even do that?!?! There are just so many loose ends and I think that is why the jury couldn't convict him!! IMO

[oxfordwebster]

If I'm not mistaken, there was no evidence whatsoever that Nona's body was arranged....no bloody drag marks on the carpet, etc. I think the crime scene showed that Nona died where she fell.I apologize. I said "body," but I meant more the scene and how the blinds were drawn open so she could be seen from the outside.

[TJEddie]

While I agree with your logic, it still would have been advantageous after JH testified, for the prosecution to have put on KJ's other partner(s) to water down the effect made by sworn testimony that Nona was unfaithful. Bad call. I'm thinking that there's more to the agreement made during sidebar than we may ever know.

I'm not following your logic. What effect would they have been trying to water down? And how would it have been advantageous to their case?

[oxfordwebster]

I was thinking about the light bulb yesterday and this came to my mind. If Kevin killed her with the lamp, why would he have even touched the bulb?? Wouldn't he hold the lamb by the base and the neck for better control?? Wouldn't the light bulb break or even be hot if it was touched during the murder?? There being blood on his hands could have come from the knife wounds....but it just doesn't sound possible for him to have held the lamp by the bulb. I guess it is possible he might have moved it before he left, but why even do that?!?! There are just so many loose ends and I think that is why the jury couldn't convict him!! IMOHe could have touched the bulb on the ground after he killed her. I don't think anyone has been trying to say he swung the lamp by the bulb.

There's more evidence that he placed it at the time of the killing than there is that he placed it when she was found, and that's just going on testimony from both prosecution and defense witnesses. I haven't even been focusing on the defense expert who said that the killer probably wiped his hand on the carpet before touching the lamp, but somehow no one mentioned carpet or other fibers (human, cat hair) in the print.

I also always leave out this part, which just goes to show why I'm so critical of this piece of evidence being ignored by the jury.

During cross-examination, Morrison admitted that liquid blood can mix with clotted blood as it leaves a body. He said the presence of clotted blood in the print would mean the print was placed at the time the body was discovered.

[lorettalockhorn]

The notes in people's mailboxes were left when they were making the timeline. Not after.

Since I don't like the thought of anyone accessing my mailbox, I take issue with the method that the Joneses used. Found this:

https://hdusps.esecurecare.net/cgi-bin/hdusps.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=7453&p_created=1129571923&p_sid=UM6Q5mfi&p_accessibility=0&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX 3Jvd19jbnQ9MjAmcF9wcm9kcz01Myw2NCZwX2NhdHM9JnBfcHY 9Mi42NCZwX2N2PSZwX3BhZ2U9MQ**&p_li=&p_topview=1&p_sid=3LhQlkHi&xssl=1

I wonder how many responses they got to their request. Was there a lack that necessitated grandmother's testimony that she had been with Kevin that morning; something that he had forgotten to mention to LE?

[LurkerNoMore]

I question the ethics of naming an employee of a jewelry ring store, which the jury heard, and then never calling him. To me, it seems like that could been used just to plant the idea in their head without having to have the witness testify.

If things like this are true, this was the most intelligent defense team ever assembled!

[partyharty]

This tactic was employed by both sides.

Good point. I was just about to say something similar. This is a tried and true lawyer trick (employed by both sides) to get the information to the jury without getting the information to the jury. I have heard many opening remarks where the attorneys stated they were going to call X and then that person was never called once the trial got underway.

To imply that it was only used by the defense is prejudicial at the least.

[oxfordwebster]

If things like this are true, this was the most intelligent defense team ever assembled!Considering that you weren't posting until after the gag order was lifted and made sure to mention that, I'm not surprised that you would praise unethical defense practices.

Honestly, I hope something comes out that the defense attorneys were abusive to other people in their defense of Kevin and people go after them.

[TJEddie]

I apologize. I said "body," but I meant more the scene and how the blinds were drawn open so she could be seen from the outside.

Oh, ok. Can't argue with that one....didn't the killer even leave blood on the blinds? Maybe he was indeed arranging them for easier discovery. If I'm not mistaken, that would be an indicator of the perp having a relationship with the victim.....wanting her body to be found rather than being left to decompose.

(And yes, I realize this can be used to support the notion that Kevin did it....but I'm not sure it wouldn't apply to others as well.)

Good catch, though.

[oxfordwebster]

Good point. I was just about to say something similar. This is a tried and true lawyer trick (employed by both sides) to get the information to the jury without getting the information to the jury. I have heard many opening remarks where the attorneys stated they were going to call X and then that person was never called once the trial got underway.

To imply that it was only used by the defense is prejudicial at the least.Great. Then maybe you can give me some names of people that were mentioned but never called by the prosecution? I haven't heard back from Christina, so maybe you can.

[lorettalockhorn]

A part of me doubts it, or they wouldn't have explained that he was a jewelry store employee. Take Martin--claiming he lied in a hearing, and then saying he was an "acquaintance" of Nona's when brought up as a witness to be called.


From what I remember, most of the witnesses were identified in the context of their testimony or personal relationship if there was one. That's why I assumed that perhaps Brent was the go to guy for KJ to have purchased a ring; maybe throwing a little business or a commission the way of a school buddy or local who uses the Jones station. So it seems odd that Hunnicutt would be identified by his job unless the testimony was to reflect the nature of his relationship to the case in the context of work.

[LurkerNoMore]

Considering that you weren't posting until after the gag order was lifted and made sure to mention that, I'm not surprised that you would praise unethical defense practices.

Honestly, I hope something comes out that the defense attorneys were abusive to other people in their defense of Kevin and people go after them.

If what was suggested is true, I don't know why it would be considered unethical.

Was the potential witness list read to the jury?

[LurkerNoMore]

If what was suggested is true, I don't know why it would be considered unethical.

Was the potential witness list read to the jury?

Also, I was being a little tongue-in-cheek. I really don't think the defense planned every little thing that meticulously. Maybe they thought they might need certain people's testimony. Did they know every card the State was going to pull? Better to be over-inclusive than leave someone out you might need. And that goes for both sides, all lawyers, every case. Look at the witness list for any trial.

[partyharty]

It was testified that Nona was extremely security conscious, so these people could not access her apartment unless you are trying to suggest that she handed out copies of her apartment key to everybody that she allowed over.

Kevin had keys to the apartment, which completely renders Nona's security moot. The body was arranged in exactly the way that Kevin attempted to have Whiteside discover, and when that didn't happen, he led everyone directly to what he arranged--a viewing from outside. He still let Whiteside see that one before him.

It was testified that she was security conscious however it was also testified to that she threw keys at the mystery guest. I have not (and would not) suggest that she handed keys out to anyone that was over at the house, however there may be more keys out there than just the 3 that are "known" about.

I dont check with my parents before I give out a key (I have several friends who have keys to my house for various reasons). The only ones who know they have keys are the friends themselves, my wife, and my oldest daughter. If my parents were asked they would assume that we only had 2-3 copies. Basically there is no way for them to know for sure how many keys were made (unless there was a key registery :) ).

As for the posing of the body and whatnot. That was not proven in trial that the body was "posed" (although I also have doubts as to this), nor was it proven that Kevin posed the body for Whiteside and his mother to find.

[oxfordwebster]

If what was suggested is true, I don't know why it would be considered unethical.I'm not surprised.

Was the potential witness list read to the jury?I believe so. That's what the paper said.

[oxfordwebster]

It was testified that she was security conscious however it was also testified to that she threw keys at the mystery guest. I have not (and would not) suggest that she handed keys out to anyone that was over at the house, however there may be more keys out there than just the 3 that are "known" about.We don't know what that person actually saw in that one-minute viewing that she had all of this detail about that she was able to recall after being talked to by people working for the defense. We don't know who the person was, what keys were thrown out, or what car was driven off in. Why exactly would Nona throw her keys out to someone to drive off, leaving her stranded?

That witness was suspect and it was shown in court.

As for the posing of the body and whatnot. That was not proven in trial that the body was "posed" (although I also have doubts as to this), nor was it proven that Kevin posed the body for Whiteside and his mother to find.I already clarified this.

[LurkerNoMore]

Considering that you weren't posting until after the gag order was lifted and made sure to mention that, I'm not surprised that you would praise unethical defense practices.

Honestly, I hope something comes out that the defense attorneys were abusive to other people in their defense of Kevin and people go after them.

So you think that the defense attorneys were unethical and the jurors were too dumb to connect the dots. Maybe the case was just very, very
weak. Is that something you might consider?

[oxfordwebster]

So you think that the defense attorneys were unethical and the jurors were too dumb to connect the dots. Maybe the case was just very, very
weak. Is that something you might consider?I'll be the first to admit that I'm not impressed with law enforcement's involvement and some of the decisions that were made during the trial, such as not pointing out things about Kevin's character.

Saying that a bloody hand print that has more evidence of being placed at the time of murder, a lack of an alibi, and multiple lies to the police aren't that indicative of a "weak" case, if you ask me.

The jury demonstrated they weren't doing their job immediately after they went to deliberation, and their sparse comments since the verdict have not given me any reason to believe otherwise.

[hawgustusgloop]

The light switch also had the kitchen light on it doesn't it? I have wondered why the kitchen light was on. And the only blood in the kitchen was a drip of Nona's blood on the stove.

If K.Jo did this..............The kitchen light was on IMO so that when RW walked around to the sliding door, he could see Nona lying on the floor. There had to be enough light that someone could see her if they were trying to peer in, but not so much that anyone who just happened to walk by would immediately notice her lying there and call 911 before K.Jo could return to contaminate the scene.

[hawgustusgloop]

This tactic was employed by both sides.

So, you DO believe that the defense listed witnesses such as the jewelry store employee and Jeremy Martin merely as a tactic and never intended to call them?

[TJEddie]

We don't know what that person actually saw in that one-minute viewing that she had all of this detail about that she was able to recall after being talked to by people working for the defense. We don't know who the person was, what keys were thrown out, or what car was driven off in. Why exactly would Nona throw her keys out to someone to drive off, leaving her stranded?

That witness was suspect and it was shown in court.

I already clarified this.

Is this Brandy Bean you're talking about? How was she suspect?

[oxfordwebster]

Is this Brandy Bean you're talking about? How was she suspect?She never saw a face and couldn't identify anybody if she wanted.

Do you really think that she's going to remember so many helpful details like she did? Do you think there is a possibility that, when the defense initially talked to Bean, that they used leading questions to get the answers they wanted?

[partyharty]

So, you DO believe that the defense listed witnesses such as the jewelry store employee and Jeremy Martin merely as a tactic and never intended to call them?

Not to answer for Christina here but my take on it is that the defense had them on the witness list to refute testimony that never came out. They had to be prepared (as one of the other posters said) for all contingencies.

As to it being a tactic with not intent to call them, they probably were going to call them if a prosecution witness had been called (or had testified a certain way).

[partyharty]

She never saw a face and couldn't identify anybody if she wanted.

Do you really think that she's going to remember so many helpful details like she did? Do you think there is a possibility that, when the defense initially talked to Bean, that they used leading questions to get the answers they wanted?

True she may not have seen a face (as for identify someone who knows, this wasnt allowed in court). As for remebering so many helpful details (love this), I would probably remember a screaming fight in which I saw someone throwing things.

As for the possibility that the defense asked leading questions. Possibly, it is also possible she remembered it.

I cannot testify about what someone will remember (esp if I dont know that person and their recollection abilities).

[hawgustusgloop]

Not to answer for Christina here but my take on it is that the defense had them on the witness list to refute testimony that never came out. They had to be prepared (as one of the other posters said) for all contingencies.

As to it being a tactic with not intent to call them, they probably were going to call them if a prosecution witness had been called (or had testified a certain way).

That seems reasonable and could very well be true. However, I responded to christina's post because someone else suggested that the defense mentioned the jewelry store employee but never truly intended to call him, and instead of suggesting any other reason like you did, christina just said that both sides used that tactic. So, I was asking her if that meant she agreed with that suggestion. Thank you for your response, though.

Also, I thought the jewelry store employee was mentioned to the jury as someone who would be called, not someone who would be called if necessary.

[oxfordwebster]

Loretta--your PM box is full :D

[hawgustusgloop]

True she may not have seen a face (as for identify someone who knows, this wasnt allowed in court). As for remebering so many helpful details (love this), I would probably remember a screaming fight in which I saw someone throwing things.

As for the possibility that the defense asked leading questions. Possibly, it is also possible she remembered it.

I cannot testify about what someone will remember (esp if I dont know that person and their recollection abilities).

Exactly! Most people would probably remember the screaming fight and the throwing of things. Not what the person may have been wearing on his wrists, how tall he was, or what his face looked like. IMO most would focus on the words being screamed and the objects being thrown.

[TJEddie]

She never saw a face and couldn't identify anybody if she wanted.

Do you really think that she's going to remember so many helpful details like she did? Do you think there is a possibility that, when the defense initially talked to Bean, that they used leading questions to get the answers they wanted?

I don't think her not being able to provide facial recognition is suspect at all. She testified to what she did see and left it at that. And yes, I did find her visual memory of seeing this guy a couple of times to be quite credible.

I also find it to be inconvenient to the prosecution because the leather wrist bands fit Trey York's physical description.

As for the "possibility" that the defense got this testimony by asking her leading questions.....why stop at that? Why not just say Brandy Bean saw nothing at all and the whole thing was conjured up by the defense? If you want to discredit a witness whose testimony you don't like, you might as well go all the way.

(Ok. That was a little snarky. I admit it.;) )

[oxfordwebster]

I don't think her not being able to provide facial recognition is suspect at all. She testified to what she did see and left it at that. And yes, I did find her visual memory of seeing this guy a couple of times to be quite credible.A couple of times? Did she testify that she saw him more than once?

I also find it to be inconvenient to the prosecution because the leather wrist bands fit Trey York's physical description.I'd find it less convenient if she could believable expect to give those kind of minute details.

As for the "possibility" that the defense got this testimony by asking her leading questions.....why stop at that? Why not just say Brandy Bean saw nothing at all and the whole thing was conjured up by the defense? If you want to discredit a witness whose testimony you don't like, you might as well go all the way.

(Ok. That was a little snarky. I admit it.;) )Snark, snark, snark.

You know as well as I do that it's in the defense's interest when questioning people to lead them along in order to get the testimony they want. I'm going to suspect because of a number of things--letters in Dover mailboxes, possibly naming people in the newspaper as a way to fish for information or to throw up more smokescreens, the naming of witnesses that were never called...

[TJEddie]

Exactly! Most people would probably remember the screaming fight and the throwing of things. Not what the person may have been wearing on his wrists, how tall he was, or what his face looked like. IMO most would focus on the words being screamed and the objects being thrown.

Now this is where I disagree. I happen to have strong visual memory (as opposed to auditory memory) and tend to recall "pictures" better than sounds or spoken words. Brandy's recollections ring entirely true to me because it fits with how I would likely remember a similar scene.

[christina]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't consider the tape to be direct testimony since there was no cross examination of his statement. What I refer to is the fact that there was no direct testimony from any of KJ's partner(s) that could have been questioned to determine the nature of the relationship.

I see your point about no cross examination taking place. Whiteside was asked about it on the stand by prosecutors and he said Jones had sex with another woman.
And remember, the boys who said they had sex with Nona were the prosecution's witnesses. I would think they would have done their homework better so as to keep them off the stand and use someone or something else to set the timeline

[oxfordwebster]

I see your point about no cross examination taking place. Whiteside was asked about it on the stand by prosecutors and he said Jones had sex with another woman.Let's not leave anything out.

Whiteside was also challenged by Phillips after he told the courtroom Jones cheated on Dirksmeyer “just once.” Phillips quoted a previous statement in which Whiteside, when asked the same question, said “I know of times that that’s happened.”

[christina]

What? Hardly. That goes against everything else I've heard and read. The prosecution took longer than originally expected, if anything. However, everybody else I've had contact with said they were surprised with the defense stopping.

I do expect your interpretations to clash with others', so it's not a huge deal, I guess.

You have not heard or read about the prosecution not even saying themselves they were resting? The judge said it for them after a break. Anyone else there Monday?
This is not intepretation, it is fact.

[oxfordwebster]

Really, I question about anything Whiteside would have claimed on the stand. For example, this part:

He was questioned extensively by Phillips about a previous statement in which he said while Jones was “straddling” the body “I tried to kind of grab him and pull him away, but he got back down.”

Phillips said WHITESIDE contradicted that statement during a Jan. 8, 2006 interview, saying that he had encouraged Jones to “keep her warm.”

WHITESIDE denied any recall of the first statement Wednesday, saying he encouraged Jones to “keep doing what you’re doing.”That January 8, 2006 interview apparently video taped, since a DVD of it was given to the defense. I don't see how he can claim to forget that when it's probably on video.

[TJEddie]

A couple of times? Did she testify that she saw him more than once?

I'd find it less convenient if she could believable expect to give those kind of minute details.

Snark, snark, snark.

You know as well as I do that it's in the defense's interest when questioning people to lead them along in order to get the testimony they want. I'm going to suspect because of a number of things--letters in Dover mailboxes, possibly naming people in the newspaper as a way to fish for information or to throw up more smokescreens, the naming of witnesses that were never called...

Yes, if I recall correctly, she said she said she recalled seeing him there 3 times. Once was taking out the garbage (Trey denied having done this, btw) and once was the screaming/door pounding. Not sure if there was anything specific about a third time.

As for the "minute details".....I covered that above. I find it entirely credible because it is consistent with how my own memory works.

Of course Brandy's testimony was in the defense's interest....no argument there. I just disagree with your suggestion that it was suspect.

[oxfordwebster]

You have not heard or read about the prosecution not even saying themselves they were resting? The judge said it for them after a break. Anyone else there Monday?
This is not intepretation, it is fact.The prosecution went for longer than was expected. The judge having to say they were rested doesn't change that. The abrupt ending of the defense isn't an interpretation, either. I've had this verified multiple times and you can't change that.

By the way, do you have the name of that FBI profiler witness the prosecution said they were going to call? You might have missed it when I asked you for that.

[oxfordwebster]

Yes, if I recall correctly, she said she said she recalled seeing him there 3 times. Once was taking out the garbage (Trey denied having done this, btw) and once was the screaming/door pounding. Not sure if there was anything specific about a third time.

As for the "minute details".....I covered that above. I find it entirely credible because it is consistent with how my own memory works.

Of course Brandy's testimony was in the defense's interest....no argument there. I just disagree with your suggestion that it was suspect.She was so good with details, that she said that he was wearing "things" on his wrist.

BRANDY BEAN, a woman who lives in an upstairs apartment across the parking lot from Dirksmeyer’s, told the jury she saw a man three times at Dirksmeyer’s apartment in the weeks before her death. She said the man was not Jones, and described him as being about 5-feet, 7-inches tall with a medium build, a dark complexion and dark hair wearing a baseball cap and “things” on his wrists.I'm convinced. How did we ever get to thinking she specifically said leather wrist wraps?

[christina]

Oh, okay. Please point out that FBI profiler on this witness list (http://couriernews.com/archived_story.php?ID=15313&Search=witness%20list).

If you claim he's missing from the list, I'm going to need his name so I can get secondary verification.

The FBI profile was given on the PCS as a reason Jones was the person they were going charging witht he murder.
But from the list you provided (not the original) I see many names that did not appear.

[oxfordwebster]

The FBI profile was given on the PCS as a reason Jones was the person they were going charging witht he murder.
But from the list you provided (not the original) I see many names that did not appear.You were there for the entire trial, Christina. You make that clear.

What name did the prosecution give for an FBI profiler that they intended to call, but did not? You made the claim, and I expect it to be backed up.

To make this more clear: Christina, did you personally hear a name in court that was given for an FBI profiler that they intended to call, or are you basing this just on the PCS?