#TheodoreWafer: Detectives to testify today about what Wafer told them

Thursday, July 24, 2014

Good morning to all:

The prosecution probably will be presenting evidence from the crime scene today and calling detectives to testify about what Wafer told them.

During her opening statement yesterday, Cheryl Carpenter told the jury that Wafer saw “not one, not two, but three people” when he opened his front door with shotgun in hand to find out who was banging on it. She said he had to open the door to see who was there because his peep hole had been smashed and he could not see anything. She also said he did not call 911 before he opened the door because he has no land line and he had misplaced his cell phone, which he did not find until after the shooting.

If his peep hole had been smashed, it must have been smashed before the incident because the exterior screen door was closed, locked and without any damage to the area corresponding to the location of the peep hole in the front door.

Corporal Gonzales testified yesterday that he arrived at Wafer’s residence within two to three minutes after the 911 call. He said Wafer was walking on the sidewalk outside his home when he arrived and he subsequently found the shotgun on the floor inside the house in the foyer just beyond the front door.

The jury will have to decide whether Wafer’s claim that he encountered “not one, not two, but three people” standing on his front porch when he opened the door and pulled the trigger killing McBride makes any sense, since he left the shotgun on the floor in the foyer and walked outside the house unarmed all the way to the sidewalk apparently unconcerned about the other two people who were with McBride when he opened the door.

In deciding whether he lied, the jury will have to consider two other statements that he made about the shooting that we are likely to hear about today.

First, he told detectives that he accidentally pulled the trigger.

Second, he told them that he shot McBride in self-defense because he believed his life was in danger.

McBride was unarmed.

Given his attorney’s preview of Wafer’s latest version of the shooting, I believe we can safely assume that Wafer will testify.

When he takes the stand, he is going to have some splainin’ to do.

And there you have it, so gather round the TV or the live stream and watch the proceedings with us and comment below.

Here’s the link:

http://www.wildabouttrial.com/one_off/theodore-wafer-trial-live-steam/

This is our 1153rd post.

If you appreciate what we do, please make a donation to enable us to keep the lights on.

Thanks,

Fred

60 Responses to #TheodoreWafer: Detectives to testify today about what Wafer told them

  1. roderick2012 says:

    “in this case, we know that neither the prosecution nor the defense had the opportunity to conduct voir dire. we also know that the jury is quite diverse ethnically and we have not even had two full days of trial yet.”

    That doesn’t mean anything. Many non-white minorities have absorbed anti-black bias from the media and are just as racist as whites so it doesn’t mean that they are going to be unaffected by the media stereotyping Renisha as a typical hoodrat.

    “your prior suggestion of calling ‘hostile witnesses’ is ludicrous. only two of the witnesses (renisha’s mother and best friend) could possibly be ‘for’ the state’s case, the rest are random folks, who in all likelihood could not be declared ‘hostile’ towards either side.”

    They would be hostile witnesses if the defense called them, but since the prosecution is doing the defense’s job for them the defense only has to cross-examine them, and that makes the defense seem more respectful in the eyes of the jury.

    • fauxmccoy says:

      no, roderick. you are wrong.

      just because the defense calls them would not in itself make them hostile witnesses. that is a very specific legal term that i don’t think you understand fully.

      unless, of course you are suggesting that the prosecution did not call McBride’s mother and best friend, which would just be stupid.

      remember when Tracy Martin was called to the stand for the defense? he was not a hostile witness. again, this is a legal term. if you don’t understand it, ask fred to help. i’m done.

  2. roderick2012 says:

    “The tragedy is that the judge, the lawyers and the jury had a chance to show the nation and the world that the criminal justice system works in Detroit even if it doesn’t work in Florida.”

    I don’t understand your point.

    Piglet’s trial was televised and neither side including Judge Nelson attempted to hide their obvious biases, intentional incompetence or corruption from the world.
    Actually it as if Seminole County was giving the rest of world the middle finger-basically this how we do justice here.
    “Excellent illustration of the well known principle that a criminal defense attorney should verify claims made by the client before asserting them as fact in an opening statement.”

    Huh?

    You’re a assuming 1) that the prosecution in this case is competent enough to address that fact and emphasizing it during their case in chief because waiting until closing statements will be too late just like the State in the George Zimmerman trial sat on their hands and allowed Serino to give his opinion about the veracity of Piglet’s story and didn’t object until the next day 2) Waiting until closing statements will allow the defense’s claim that the peephole was broken to go unchallenged for at least a week in the minds of jurors, and we know from B37’s post trial comments that once someone hears something it’s difficult to alter especially if a juror has a predisposed bias.

    BTW why is the prosecution in this case recounting what occurred before the shooting as if they have accepted that Renisha should be on trial too?

    This seems a lot like Corey and her minions acquiescing to the assumption that Piglet’s bloody nose resulted from Trayvon having assaulted him.

    Has this prosecution concluded that Renisha got what she deserved as well?

    • Nef05 says:

      Clearly I can’t answer the questions regarding the prosecutors, but I will say that their boss, Kym Worthy, is as different from Corey as night is to day.

      She is the prosecutor who charged former sitting Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick with 8 felonies a couple of years before the feds. Her charges led to his guilty plea on two counts, jail time while he waited for the federal indictments and his ultimate resignation.

      Even Kilpatrick’s supporters were impressed by Worthy’s refusal to flinch. The prosecutor would settle for nothing less than a guilty conviction in the perjury case against Kilpatrick, and she was willing to resist pressure from the most powerful men in Motor City, many of whom tried to persuade her to give the mayor a break.

      She is also personally prosecuted and got convictions against Budzyn and Nevers, the two white police officers who beat Malice Green to death. She was also a judge for 10 years, before she was appointed to take over the Wayne County prosecutor’s office.

      She’s an equal opportunity prosecutor. She doesn’t give a damn who you are, if you broke the law, and she’s serious about it. Although it shouldn’t matter, I will also mention she is a black woman. If her prosecutors don’t do their jobs, they will have a problem. There won’t be any winks and nudges a la Corey and her team.

      “Change for us in Detroit means we finally are holding people accountable,” explains Vercher-Morrow. “That is where Kym Worthy came in with her process of right is right and wrong is wrong. She’s like, I don’t care what your name is. Kym Worthy is really the first to say, I see something wrong and I am not afraid to do something about it.” NO ROOM FOR COMPROMISE

      Read her bio here:
      http://www.waynecounty.com/prosecutor/321.htm

      • roderick2012 says:

        I know Worthy is black, but I see her making the same ‘mistakes’ as the State did in Piglet’s case.

        The defense should be reconstructing McBride’s activities leading up to the shooting not the State if they really want to gain a conviction.

        • fauxmccoy says:

          @roderick — we are likely to disagree on this tactic, but i see it somewhat differently.

          there is no doubt that these things will come up, via the ME’s report and the defense. i think it is better for the prosecution to play offense and just get it out of the way as matter of fact and quickly as possible.

          i think this for two reasons — one, it will reduce any ‘shock value’ of this info coming from the defense, drastically and two, it shows the jury that the prosecution is not hiding anything which could lead to mistrust.

          • roderick2012 says:

            “@roderick — we are likely to disagree on this tactic, but i see it somewhat differently.
            there is no doubt that these things will come up, via the ME’s report and the defense. i think it is better for the prosecution to play offense and just get it out of the way as matter of fact and quickly as possible.”

            I am not talking about the ME report I am talking about the witnesses re-enacting McBride’s behavior before she was murdered.

            There’s no reason the prosecution should be helping the defense in any way. Make them earn their pay. Force the defense to call those witnesses who saw McBride before she was murdered as hostile witnesses.

            The prosecution’s attempt to minimize McBride’s condition before she was murdered is only going to reinforce to the jury that even the State believes that McBride’s condition played a part in her death.

            It would be much easier to cross exam those who witnessed McBride before she was murdered and minimize the damage than questioning them directly and having your own witnesses bury the victim.

            This is just like Corey’s minions calling John Guy and Mark Osterman as State witnesses and allowing them to lie about certain circumstances and not using direct exam of Osterman to reinforce that Piglet lied his arse off about Trayvon and Piglet having struggled over the gun even though Trayvon’s fingerprints were found on the gun.

            Just like John Guy spent how much time telling the jurors in the Michael Dunn case that Jordan Davis was a loudmouth?

            WTF?

            “i think this for two reasons — one, it will reduce any ‘shock value’ of this info coming from the defense, drastically and two, it shows the jury that the prosecution is not hiding anything which could lead to mistrust.”

            This is a high profile local case so there is no ‘shock’ value left. People have already heard details (correct or incorrect) and made up their minds about what occurred that night shortly after they heard.

            You falsely believe the idea that lying by omission applies to a court case. It’s about presenting evidence that helps your case and not presenting evidence that doesn’t help your case. Not emphasizing certain aspects of a case isn’t lying it’s good lawyering especially when the prosecution seems to be engaging in victim blaming.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            i think we are speaking across each other, for lack of a better explanation. there is no possible way for the prosecution to avoid the subject of McBride’s BAC and weed consumption because of the ME report. it is for that reason alone that i believe the prosecution must address that head on. there are other reasons why these witnesses are being called — largely to indicate that there was no anger or hostility in McBride’s demeanor which strongly contradicts the defense’s story. i see value in that, you do not.

            the prosecutor as the representative of the state has a duty to present all facts and still prove their case. that is just the way it is.

            this trial is very difficult to follow without video and by tweets only, but who was it who asked for the walking demonstration? i do not think it was the prosecutor. these witnesses will be called, regardless of which side calls them. it is my contention that by the prosecution calling them that they have greater ability to control the narrative. again, you do not.

            finally, i take serious objection to your statement

            You falsely believe the idea that lying by omission applies to a court case

            i in no way indicated anything of the sort and would not. i do not even understand how you would come up with such an assertion.

          • roderick2012 says:

            fauxmccoy27m
            “i think we are speaking across each other, for lack of a better explanation. there is no possible way for the prosecution to avoid the subject of McBride’s BAC and weed consumption because of the ME report. it is for that reason alone that i believe the prosecution must address that head on. there are other reasons why these witnesses are being called — largely to indicate that there was no anger or hostility in McBride’s demeanor which strongly contradicts the defense’s story. i see value in that, you do not.”

            No one says that the State has to avoid McBride’s BAC or weed consumption. I am just saying that let the defense bring it up since McBride’s behavior that night is going to be their defense. There’s no reason that the State has to assist the defense in any way.
            My point is that the State attempting to neutralize facts in the ME report or explain them away during their case in chief is only going to make the juror believe that McBride’s behavior was a factor in her death which is again the defense’s job.

            “the prosecutor as the representative of the state has a duty to present all facts and still prove their case. that is just the way it is.”

            The State can pick and choose from the evidence to prove their case. They just can’t withhold any evidence from the defense.

            “this trial is very difficult to follow without video and by tweets only, but who was it who asked for the walking demonstration? i do not think it was the prosecutor. these witnesses will be called, regardless of which side calls them. it is my contention that by the prosecution calling them that they have greater ability to control the narrative. again, you do not.”

            It doesn’t matter who requested the witness to demonstrate how Renisha was walking the point is that the lady is a State witness and the prosecution spending too much of their time focusing on what Renisha did that night and not enough on what Wafer did and his lies

            “i in no way indicated anything of the sort and would not. i do not even understand how you would come up with such an assertion.”

            You just stated that you believe that the State has an obligation to present all of the evidence available. I don’t believe that is the case. The State only has the obligation to share all of their evidence with the defense.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            roderick — at this point, i am begging you to get real. the prosecution CANNOT wait for the defense to bring up the BAC and weed BECAUSE of the ME report. as a matter of fact, the prosecution must present the ME report in their case in chief. there is no debate in this basic fact.

            my opinion is that it is better to control the narrative, you disagree, from what i can gather because frankly, your comments are not making much sense to me.

            furthermore, you made an accusation about me, which i refuted and now you wish to make another.

            please refer to http://www.americanbar.org/publications/criminal_justice_section_archive/crimjust_standards_pfunc_blk.html

            pay special attention to sections 3-1.2 (c) and 3-2.8 (a). the prosecution cannot ignore the BAC and weed as their duty to the court prevents them from doing so.

            i would very much appreciate it if you would stop flinging accusations at me if we do not agree on something. please notice that i am not treating you in such a fashion.

          • roderick2012 says:

            The State is doing much more than reviewing McBride’s BAC and the weed in the ME’s report.

            They are doing a full re-enactment of her activities before Wafer murdered her.

            The only reason that Worthy is doing this is because she is trying to negate the McBride’s reputation for drunkenness and using weed which all of the jurors have read or heard about in the press.

            The problem is as the Professor reminded us–prosecutors do a lousy job at juror selection and Worthy knows from the Trayvon Martin jury selection that whites tend to absorb and repeat negative narratives about black victims and this her attempt to neutralize a stealth juror.

            Unfortunately, at least one B37 has been able to get on this jury and the best Worthy can hope for is a hung jury and possibly a retrail although she should have attempted to work out a plea bargain with Wafer because she will never gain a conviction against him in racially polarized America.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            in this case, we know that neither the prosecution nor the defense had the opportunity to conduct voir dire. we also know that the jury is quite diverse ethnically and we have not even had two full days of trial yet.

            your prior suggestion of calling ‘hostile witnesses’ is ludicrous. only two of the witnesses (renisha’s mother and best friend) could possibly be ‘for’ the state’s case, the rest are random folks, who in all likelihood could not be declared ‘hostile’ towards either side.

            at this point, i refuse to engage with you because i find that you do not argue in good faith, but resort to slinging unsupported allegations when others do not agree with you.

            fare well.

  3. fauxmccoy says:

    i would like to express my gratitude to those of you with life experience in detroit — namely MKX and dave. your comments carry a lot of weight for me in this matter. thank you so much for you very thoughtful and insightful commentary.

    so, it appears that there will be no live feed per the judge’s order? is this what others understand? the time of the trial does not work well for me as a californian :/ and i desperately want to view the proceedings. grrrrrrrr.

  4. fauxmccoy says:

    dear mother of god, this makes me sick. clubbing the man in the head would have been no less barbaric. this is NOT how i wish to be seen as an american citizen. i just sit back and ponder what is wrong with our national psyche such that this is ‘OK’ with way too many people. when you stop to think that we are a nation of immigrants and that the majority of countries we came from have ceased state sponsored killing, i have to assume that there is something deeply wrong with us. i am ashamed and embarrassed for my country yet again.

  5. bettykath says:

    another OT

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/07/23/334632862/arizona-execution-of-inmate-takes-nearly-two-hours

    Arizona Execution Of Inmate Takes Nearly 2 Hours

    by
    July 23, 2014 7:54 PM ET
    An undated file photo from the Arizona Department of Corrections shows inmate Joseph Rudolph Wood, who was executed Wednesday. After the lethal injection process began, Wood reportedly remained alive for nearly two hours.

    Another U.S. execution has gone awry, as Arizona officials who were attempting to put inmate Joseph Rudolph Wood to death today instead watched him gasp and snort for more than an hour after the mix of lethal injection drugs was administered, Wood’s attorney says.

    Nearly two hours after the execution began at 1:52 p.m. local time Wednesday, Wood was pronounced dead at 3:49 p.m.

    “Joe Wood is dead, but it took him two hours to die,” said Troy Hayden of KSAZ-TV in Phoenix, who served as a witness. “And to watch a man lay there for an hour and 40 minutes gulping air, I can liken it to, if you catch a fish and throw it on the shore, the way the fish opens and closes its mouth.”

    The problems led Wood’s federal public defender, Jon Sands, to to stay the execution on the grounds that it violated his client’s constitutional rights. Sands’ motion called for reviving Woods, but the inmate died within an hour of the papers being filed.

    The defense attorney’s motion describes the execution:

    “The Arizona Department of Corrections began the execution of Joseph Rudolph Wood III at 1:52 p.m. At 1:57 p.m ADC reported that Mr. Wood was sedated, but at 2:02 he began to breathe. At 2:03 his mouth moved. Mr. Wood has continued to breathe since that time. He has been gasping and snorting for more than an hour. At 3:02 p.m. At that time, staff rechecked for sedation. He is still alive. This execution has violated Mr. Wood’s Eighth Amendment right to be executed in the absence of cruel and unusual punishment.”

    Update at 10:15 p.m. ET: Gov. Brewer Orders Review

    Saying she was concerned by how long the execution took, Gov. Jan Brewer said she had “directed the Department of Corrections to conduct a full review of the process.”

    “One thing is certain, however, inmate Wood died in a lawful manner and by eyewitness and medical accounts he did not suffer. This is in stark comparison to the gruesome, vicious suffering that he inflicted on his two victims — and the lifetime of suffering he has caused their family.”

    On All Things Considered Wednesday night, , who had witnessed the execution. He says he counted Wood gulping hundreds of times before he died. Looking around, he says “there appeared to be some concern from prison officials.”

    He says medical staff came in to check on Wood at least four times, checking his heart rate and look at his eyes. Marin says he also saw Wood’s attorney sending out a staff member to try to stop the execution partway through.

    Update at 8:45 p.m. ET: Reactions From Arizona

    In , Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne did not comment on the nearly two-hour time frame. Instead, he noted that Wood had been sentenced to death in July of 1992 for shooting and killing his estranged girlfriend, Debra Dietz, and her father, Eugene Dietz, at their family’s auto shop.

    Members of the Dietz family were in attendance in Arizona today. Jeane Brown, Debra Dietz’s sister, said that Wood’s execution “was nothing.”

    “You don’t know what excruciating is — seeing your dad lying there in a pool of blood. … This man deserved it,” Brown told the . “And I shouldn’t call him a man. He deserved everything he had coming to him.”

    One of Wood’s attorneys, Dale Baich, issued a statement that read in part:

    “The experiment using midazolam combined with hydromorphone to carry out an execution failed today in Arizona. It took Joseph Wood two hours to die, and he gasped and struggled to breath for about an hour and forty minutes. We will renew our efforts to get information about the manufacturer of drugs as well as how Arizona came up with the experimental formula of drugs it used today.”

    Our original report continues:

    As we’ve reported in the past, executions in and Oklahoma have been widely criticized for using a new mixture of drugs that are being blamed for being less effective than the traditional drug that is now under a shortage in the U.S. In the Oklahoma case, an inmate died after the first of the drugs were administered.

    Last month, death row inmates sued to stop those states from using combinations of lethal injection drugs that have been blamed for recent problems. They’ve also sought to require officials to disclose the “cocktail” mixture of the drugs they plan to use.

    Controversies over execution methods have erupted as states struggle to find suitable alternatives to drugs that are now in short supply.

    As , “Legal pressures and concerns from European manufacturers have made traditional execution drugs unavailable to states. That has caused states to scramble — some say experiment — and try out new drug combinations.”

    As reports, “Wood, 55, was sentenced to death in 1991 for the August 1989 shooting deaths of his estranged girlfriend, Debra Dietz, and her father, Eugene Dietz, in Tucson.”

  6. bettykath says:

    OT

    Today, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Poland was complicit in the CIA’s “extraordinary rendition” program by allowing the agency to run a “black site” in a Polish forest. The ECHR also found that the CIA’s so-called enhanced interrogation techniques meet the definition of torture. Criminal prosecutions of those who ordered and facilitated these heinous acts must follow. The Obama DOJ still refuses to prosecute the U.S. officials who directed the program. We must use this historic ruling and the Senate Torture Report to demand accountability for these crimes –this is the only way to ensure they won’t be repeated. National courts in other states should also prosecute both U.S. and non-U.S. torturers under the principle of universal jurisdiction. The CIA torture program involved varying levels of participation by more than 50 countries. They all have a responsibility to bring torturers to justice. For more on CCR’s work abroad using universal jurisdiction, see: http://bit.ly/1mKlgl7

  7. Malisha says:

    Two-Sides, OT but —
    Here’s an example of the glass objects made with Mt. St. Helens ash:

    http://www.pacificnorthwestshop.com/shop-by-theme/glass-eye-studio-mt-st-helens-volcanic-ash-hand-blown-glass.html

    • Cool, thanx! I’m now having some vague memory of actually having read something like this before but long ago forgotten it. My memory is pretty holey these days.

      Ain’t nature fascinatin’?

    • bettykath says:

      I bought a number of these objects in 1985 when I was on my one year RV ramble. NC to NY to ME to NY to WI to TX to NM to CA to WA to NY.

      • fauxmccoy says:

        that sounds like a lovely trip, betty kath. the husband and i plan to spend our retirement in a vintage but restored airstream and go where the wind takes us. i have seen most of the country due to family relations spread far and wide, but the husband has not. i’m looking forward to it. only problem will be our age difference — when he retires, i will be in my 70s. hope i can still enjoy and that my disability does not worsen too much with age.

  8. Malisha says:

    This is just plain OT and I’m sorry but I HAD TO run this url for y’all to read. I got a simultaneous pain in my heart and belly laugh from the way the ONION treated this tragedy:

    http://www.theonion.com/articles/israels-hamas-disregard-for-palestinian-life-align,36531/?utm_source=The+Onion&utm_campaign=db0d96059d-The_Onion_Newsletter_Daily_Template&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6a8b5ad20e-db0d96059d-17295181

    • crustyolemothman says:

      Malisha, While I normally rate the Onion as just one step above the Murdoch owned rag’s, in this case they somehow got the story right… If they are not careful some day they might actually be considered a true source for the news, then again perhaps if you consider what you find on FAUX News on the average day, the Onion is perhaps a more reputable source already….

      • Malisha says:

        Things have gotten so totally insane that a friend of mine who did not know what the ONION was BELIEVED a story they reported. Things are so bad that not only is fact stranger than fiction, but the persistent idiotically unrealistic is more believable than the mundane and every-day experiences most of us suffer.

  9. crustyolemothman says:

    I just read a twit er that the police officer on the scene looked thru the peep hole and it was not broken. Does that not add another nail to the box that TW’s attorney has put him into? Oh well, just another lie from the defendant, no big deal, right?

    • Malisha says:

      It seems to me that the rule about defendants giving untrue statements is really:

      Any untrue statement made by defendant can be explained by the fact that he did not know at the time he made the statement just which fake defense was going to be used. That’s unfair. A defendant has a constitutional right to know which fake defense is the preferred one so he can stick to it from the beginning. Any lies told inadvertently by the defendant can be explained by entrapment: the police interviews initially conducted were trying to entrap the defendant by asking him to venture a guess as to what would best work to get him off.

      • crustyolemothman says:

        Malisha, Now you’ve gone and done it! The GOP/TP/NRA/KOCH party will soon place your words in all the new law books and it will become recognized law…

    • fauxmccoy says:

      how to be hip guide for crusty old folks — info received from twitter are called ‘tweets’ … not that i pay too much attention to this at 50, but i have a much younger husband to help me with this kind of stuff 😉

    • Great catch Crusty!

      Excellent illustration of the well known principle that a criminal defense attorney should verify claims made by the client before asserting them as fact in an opening statement.

      Prosecutors have a way of serving up those statements in closing argument reminding the jury of what was said forcing the defense attorney to sit at counsel table and eat the shit sandwich a bite at a time while attempting to appear unruffled. They also challenge the defense attorney to explain to the jury why they said what they said.

      I’ve seen many a defense attorney blush, break out into a sweat, lose concentration and deliver an unfocused defense to the indefensible accusation instead of owning the error, apologizing for it, and earnestly ask the jury to not hold the client responsible for the lawyer’s mistake. Then its back to arguing presumption of innocence and stressing the points that support reasonable doubt.

      Unfortunately, the court’s decision to ban the livestream means that we and the rest of the viewing public will miss how this plays out unless a reporter tweets about it, which is extremely unlikely since they are not skilled trial lawyers who notice and appreciate events like this that occasionally affect the verdict. Oralandar Brand-Williams reported what Cheryl Carpenter said, but no one else picked up on it and I’m not even sure she realized that this was a new version.

      I realized that it was and wrote about it, but no one else did. Unless someone read my blog, they would not know what happened.

      BTW, that little statement that Carpenter made is extremely significant because it amounts to an admission that she knows they cannot win an acquittal unless more scary attackers are thrown into the mix to support his claim that he was terrified and believed his life was in danger when he fired the shotgun through the locked screen door.

      Unfortunately for Wafer, he did not keep his mouth shut and the two explanations that he provided to the police not only cannot both be true, neither one constitutes a reasonable use of deadly force in self-defense when two locked doors separated him from an unarmed 19-year-old girl knocking on his door at 4:30 am.

      Just as desperate Hail-Mary passes into the end zone to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat as time expires in a football game rarely succeed, introducing a third version of events to replace two conflicting earlier versions that, if true, would coincidentally fit the known facts like a hand in a glove only invites arched eyebrows, intense skepticism and the formation of firm opinions that the defendant, with the assistance of his lawyer, is an opportunistic liar who is guilty as sin.

  10. crustyolemothman says:

    Have we quit for the day? Frustration set in and left in disgust?

  11. girlp says:

    I can’t get the feed to work properly

  12. I find it interesting that we have to run through all of what Renisha did during the day, alcohol consumption, car crash etc etc…yet in zimmerman’s case, none of his actions mattered until the shot. Any intox tests for the killers though? No.

  13. girlp says:

    Why is page changing her statement, now she does not know if Renisha was bleeding or if she was injured and she doesn’t remember if the victim was the same person in the accident??????????

    • Dave says:

      It was after midnight and many Detroit neighborhoods lack streetlights. This happened 7 months ago and the witness didn’t know that Ms. McBride was going to be shot a few hours later.

    • Malisha says:

      “His life is forever changed.” Right. This is all about him.

      The “banging on side door” and “banging on front door” are a clever way to try to bring in the mystery attackers, but for one little thing: After blowing Renisha McBride to the Kingdom Come, did he run to the side door to kill the other marauders? Or did he call in, drop his gun inside and then wander out into the deathfields to expose himself to the murderous horde?

      • Dave says:

        According to the officer who first arrived on the scene he only came out after officer knocked on the front door.

  14. MKX says:

    This tale is ridiculous.

    First, if the peephole is blocked, why not turn on the porch light and observe through the living room window?

    Second. if there were three attackers, then why did the PD not go out looking for them?

    Third, as already pointed out, why would Wafer then put his gun down and walk around outside in face of two other attackers who may or may not be armed with guns.

    No, I think this guy lost his temper because McBride was damaging his property and the walk around was to check on all that he really cares about – his f’in house. Never mind he gruesomely killed a human being.

    No wonder he is alone at 55.

    • Malisha says:

      I am REALLY curious about Wafer’s wife, wives or ex-wives, girlfriends or ex-girlfriends, boyfriends or ex-boyfriends, children, other contacts, and neighbors. Isn’t it peculiar that NOBODY has covered anything? One ex-girlfriend said he was a drunk but not an abuser. She remained anonymous. Nobody has said much and no journalists seem to have been looking for anything. It’s as if this man did not exist until he opened the door and blew another human being away thinking she might be “shorter” and/or “hispanic or Arabic.”

      • MKX says:

        You would have to either be blind, stupid or a liar to not know that Renisha McBride was African American. Is this his “I am not a racist because I did not know she was black” excuse?

        The similarities with the “deification” of Zimmerman are beginning to emerge.

        Zimmerman was not a racist because he was “part black” and mentored virtual black children.

        Well heckadoodle, I just solved the crime.

        The virtual black children, because they could no longer be mentored by Saint Zimmerman, fell into a life of crime and drugs, and were there with McBride.:)

    • Turning a porch light on is sometimes enough to scare a prowler off.

  15. To follow the trial on twitter, go to #TheodoreWafer

    • Malisha says:

      The “WHY” would seem to me to be answered as follows:

      So long as nobody REALLY sees what’s going on as it happens, all they can do later is gripe and get called “conspiracy theorists.”

  16. The Trial File ‏@TheTrialFile 4m
    Judge Hathaway issued a court order.

    No livestream of the #TheodoreWafer / #RenishaMcBride trial.

  17. Can’t wait to hear if these other “shadowy figures” were mentioned to the Detectives that night. If he was so in fear, opening his door would be like putting your arm in the alligator’s mouth because your afraid he is going to bite you. If any of these jurors can get past that fact, and deem that this was okay, it’s going to be pretty unbelievable, to me. Yet, they actually believed Jordan Davis, had a shotgun…so who knows!

    • MKX says:

      Exactly.

      Common sense is that one stays back with a gun when faced with multiple threats. It is the converse of the self-defense rush a gun run from a knife rule.

      And he had perfect cover behind an inner door with a gun ready to fire.

      And how did he know that these imaginary three were not armed?

  18. Malisha says:

    I do not trust the process. We may see cops up there explaining FOR Wafer. We may see a new version of Singleton and serino holding up two sides of the scales of justice for their protege, to make sure he doesn’t suffer any negative consequences for killing someone they would just as soon have killed themselves. Our courts bring shame on our whole country.

    • So true Malisha. I always read Fredrick Leatherman’s blog. I have been a fan since the Trayvon Martin killing. Was a blogger on Huff Post black voices through the case, until it got super ugly. AKA, Japanese Girlsan. I enjoy reading your comments and others.

      • Welcome to our blog. Please feel free to share your experiences, insights and opinions with us.

        In a perfect world, there wouldn’t be any lurkers. Everyone at one time or another would comment without fear of being wrong, criticised or attacked.

        or example, feelings and opinions about the deplorable situation in Gaza are running hot. They are so hot and firmly held that it’s virtually impossible for people to express their opinions on a blog site without resorting to ad hominem attacks.

        We have managed to carry on a civil discussion in which each side learned something new and I think that is our enduring strength. Although we are a group of people from mixed backgrounds and beliefs, we respect each individual and we learn from each other.

        We have only one rule, the Rule of Reciprocity which is also known as the Golden Rule:

        Rabbi Hillel said it best.

        That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.

        Hope to see you in the comments soon.

      • fauxmccoy says:

        hello, japanese girlsan — i remember you! we were fighting in the trenches alright. like you, i left when it became too ugly to tolerate. i have since left huffpo entirely because of the merge with aol, thus downgrading the comment content and due to their requirement to sign in using a ‘verified’ facebook, giving HP ful access to all of my personal info, along with that of my friends. i can honestly say that i do not miss it. my account was deleted in november of last year.

        welcome to this blog, i think you will find it a much kinder place.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: