#TheodoreWafer: Closing arguments begin Wednesday morning

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

Good afternoon:

Both sides have rested and Judge Hathaway is instructing the jury with closing arguments by counsel to follow.

To review Wafer’s testimony this morning, go here.

Many thanks to Oralandar Brand-Williams who was my source for tweets again today and to Dave and his source for tweets, Gina Damron.

Closing arguments will start tomorrow at 9 am.

18 Responses to #TheodoreWafer: Closing arguments begin Wednesday morning

  1. crustyolemothman says:

    Does anyone have the Detroit Free Press link to their live twitter commentary?

    • MKX says:

      Wafer: “I did what I had to do”

      Good God, I don’t know whether to get angry or just cry.

      • ay2z says:

        And he said he “didn’t go out and ask for this”. Sounds like a possible hint at blaming others– someone ‘brought this to’ me.

        • aussie says:

          True he didn’t go out and ask for this. He just OPENED THE DOOR TO IT. The trouble was out there. He knew it was. He could hear it. He could feel it shaking the house. He didn’t ask for it, it was brought to him.


          or somehow an open door is better entry prevention than a closed one?

          He was drunk/hung over and not thinking straight. He’d gone home after “3 beers” but at 4.30 am was asleep in a CHAIR in his underwear (phone was in jeans pocket in the bathroom). The room had glass blocks instead of a window, and NO BLINDS, so someone passing would see the TV going and think it’s a good place to get help because someone is AWAKE in there.

      • Sc0rp says:

        He didn’t have to open the door. That’s not doing what he had to do.

  2. J4TMinATL says:

    I’m shocked prosecutor pointed gun at jurors and acknowledged jurors reactions during cross of Wafer, then denied it later when defense argued for mistrial. I guess there are no consequences. Also regarding instructions for breaking in, prosecutor argues for them not to be included because no evidence of breaking in and the porch comes up. Defense says castle doctrine and porch is included. Michigan law agrees. I don’t see any point in including instructions or definition on breaking in.

    Not shocked that Wafer says we wouldn’t be here if the EMS had showed up referring to car crash. Not smart. Not surprised he’d say that out loud.

    • Sc0rp says:

      There is a difference between having to retreat on your own property and using deadly force because someone is apparently (loudly) knocking on your locked door from the outside on your porch. He wouldn’t have to retreat if he were standing on his lawn, but that doesn’t automatically give him the right to open fire on someone that’s on his lawn because at that point they are not a home invader.

    • bettykath says:

      If that little stoop is considered part of his “castle”, all delivery people are at risk.

      • J4TMinATL says:

        It is. Law says it is. Castle Doctrine. Has nothing to do with delivery people. They don’t deliver at 4:30am. They knock usually twice and if you don’t answer they leave. During day time one can look out window and see UPS or FedEx truck. And many people are at work when delivery people deliver. They also wear uniforms.

        @scorp, not talking about lawn. Talking about porch.

      • J4TMinATL says:

        Judge is including that porch is part of house in castle doctrine instructions / definitions.

        • Shouldn’t matter because he was never under attack.

          • MKX says:

            As I understand it, one still has to reasonably believe that there is an attempt at breaking in for Castle Doctrine to apply. I fail to see how end empty handed female who may or may not have pounded on doors meets that standard.

            And Wafer failed to accurately assess the situation before he fired.

            A loose screen that may or may not have been caused by McBride along with a few smudges is not evidence of a break in attempt.

            And we have the officer on the scene who testified that he saw no evidence of a break in.

            And we have a neighbor who saw nothing extraordinary.

            In summary:

            Zero physical evidence

            Wafer’s word which is vested in not telling the truth vs. a police officer and neighbor who have no reason to lie.

          • J4TMinATL says:

            Which is why judge won’t include breaking and entering definition / instructions requested by defense.

            But I agree with you Fred that doesn’t matter but I’m not sure what these jurors will think.

  3. MKX says:

    This seems rather simple.

    Was is it proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Wafer did not need to shoot or even point a gun at McBride?

    IMO, it was.

    Wafer’s tale, all its inconsistency aside is basically:

    I am sitting here scared, but safe with my gun, and am mad that I am being victimized.

    So I am going to act and show whoever is out there that I will not be a victim.

    It is Dunne all over again.

    I told them to turn it down and don’t like them making me a victim by sassing me back.

    So I will pull out my gun and show them whose boss.

    The problem, as in the Dunne trial, is that there may be some stealth jurors who feel showing “neighborhood changers” or “renters” who is boss is ok.

    The best result for Wafer will be a hung jury.

    I hope that it gets bargained to at least involuntary manslaughter.

    I would vote for M2. His ill will and callous disregard for human life is quite apparent.

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: