Owner of Campbell's Cottage arrested

Jessica Murr wrote:
There is so much information that the jury and courtroom heard that we haven't been informed about. That is usually the case...the media picks up on a few certain things and the rest go by the wayside. So, I agree that what the media has presented to us, does not seem to be enough to convict someone. However, having some 'inside people'....it has been pretty evident from the begining that the prosecutors had more than enough information/evidence to make a conviction easy. And that seemed to be confirmed by the jury's quick decision.

There were no "inside people", just major (Ott) assumptions. The prosecutors didn't have any evidence other than video of Susan leaving the store. They filled in the blanks with Susans name because a coincidence is as sure as fact in their opinion. The jurys quick decision was based mostly that the defense's expert witness couldn't testify and they wanted to go home. The local news stations just reported the juicey "tune in at six details" for a soap opera effect.

I meant that I knew some of the people involved in the investigation, etc (therefore the 'inside people'). The evidence that was found spoke for itself. Susan's lawyer, T Clay is one of the best in Louisville. He is who I would go to if I needed someone and I have lawyers in my family. Since none of us were there, then we don't really know the truth of what happened.
Jessica

But Robin,

You DID write that she is innocent in your sticky. You wrote "She is innocent and is appealing this ruling. I am asking for your help so that she can stay out of jail during her appeal process. "

I must admit to being initially somewhat taken aback at the boldness of your claim. I almost PM'd you to see if you had some kind of inside information .

Linda B. wrote that. I pasted her note, with my comment at the beginning of the post that I was doing so.

Righty-O. Thanks, Robin. I stand corrected. Don't know how I missed that in my first reading.

I guess the "She is innocent" part just jumped out at me, and kept me from noticing the rest...oops.....

Still, she had a good lawyer, and if a good lawyer can't get someone off the hook in this legal system (which is generally skewed in favor of those with good lawyers), well, they may be in trouble.

Hopefully, she makes it through this whole ordeal ok, regardless of innocence or guilt.

Yeah, so here is the deal.

I do not know Susan. I'm not making an effort to delve into this story since it's already biased from multiple angles of guilt or innocence. My HOPE being truth finally show itself; whatever the verdict. Good luck to persons defending Susan's character and those willing to stand behind their own opinions of said case. I feel personal bias will prevent some from ever believing the real truths. And, of course , no one knows them at this time.

Pardon me, I have to leave to go be shamed for not sticking up for a person I have no personal relations.

Did you really just do that? You took my call-to-arms for people that know her and turned it around...

You can't be shamed because you have no dog in this fight.

Personal bias = yeah, I've got personal bias, but I also never said the woman did or didn't do it. If you were a father and your son was convicted of murder, you would stand beside him, send him money in prison and visit him often. The family bonds don't simply evaporate because one of us has a bad day, week, month or year.

You just tried to supplant my stream-of-consciousness with sophistry. A good attempt, yet this technique falls short when the other person understands what it is you are doing. Then it's pretty easy to pick apart. I'd be happy to do it for you, if that is what you want...

Ya know, it's easy to come behind the next person and say 'you missed a spot.' It's much tougher to take a stand for someone you care about, when you know your opinion may not be popular.

I've spent most of my professional life dealing with people who use this high-school game approach. Bring it, brother... at least you aren't attempting to form a back-door 'coalition' against me.

We still get to go have a beer! I still love you and think highly of your intellect. I find your opinions some of the most well-thought I have seen...

Your turn, hehe!


PS. Robin put it best: I do not represent the site, ever. I act on my own, in the most well-intentioned of aspirations. Any vitriol you may have should be directed against me, nobody else. Don't call me to the yard and hold it agianst these fine people, of which you are one...

PSS. You do, of course, realize, I am a Mortimer Adler guy- I already know and understand your argument before you have made it. That's the duty...

G, you were right- R won this point, yet I have to get it outta my head before I can focus attention on S.

Otherwise, I stew, immersed in things unfinished.

/ick

You can't be shamed because you have no dog in this fight.

You're right. I do not. And, I have no shame.

Personal bias = yeah, I've got personal bias, but I also never said the woman did or didn't do it. If you were a father and your son was convicted of murder, you would stand beside him, send him money in prison and visit him often. The family bonds don't simply evaporate because one of us has a bad day, week, month or year.

But, Family bonds do evaporate and because of far less nefarious deeds.

Ya know, it's easy to come behind the next person and say 'you missed a spot.' It's much tougher to take a stand for someone you care about, when you know your opinion may not be popular.

I don't know the person. What should I do, Steve? Feel guilty about not sticking up for a person I've never had personal contact in my life? Stand behind them? Ignore them? I believe in truth. But, that's difficult to stand by because no one knows it until then end; perhaps maybe not all of it. Then, people accuse a person of only waiting till the truth shows till their mind is made up.



-I would have pegged you more as a David Hume fan, Steve.

Great retort, Kyle.

Let's leave that as the last word. I really dig your POV ...

Nah, I dig your approach even more!

Happy Memorial Day, Steven!

Robin.."She is innocent"...........I misread the post and attributed these words to you which you did not speak. My apologies. I was wrong.

Given, I should have been more sensitive coming into your clubhouse and criticizing one of you club members, but....."Bill Veneman....What we must keep in mind is "one of our own is in trouble"

Bill..I don't know you, so this is not meant to be a personal attack. I just really get sick of the "one of our own" talk. Despicable actions are just that, regardless of what "club" you belong to.

Stephen D...I was honestly surprised by your comments. Again, I don't know you. Though your comments seemed classless based upon who I thought you were based upon your other posts.

Matt Bates..."I hope the tea-bagging"..You have no idea about my political beliefs. If you think you do based upon my postings or aviator, you are as misguided as I already think you are.

"traitor J burns in hell!"..I guess I may be overly sensitive to the word traitor based upon the choices I have made in my life. That comment actually offended me and I am usually pretty emotion-free.

"Would it be OK if J wasn't here to defend himself?"...I am sorry that I haven't been here to defend myself. Recreational internet access on an Afghanistan US Military base is spotty.

"traitor J burns in hell!"--I won't focus on what I dedicated my life doing in an effort to avoid Stephen from posting "You signed up for the military, stop complaining about risking death for your country."

Recreational internet access on an Afghanistan US Military base is spotty.

Thanks for your service, J, and happy belated Memorial Day.

[Robin Garr]

"J", I have a couple of concerns.

First, did we have a conversation about your single-letter first name when you joined the forum? I'm surprised I approved that, for the simple reason that not being able to address you by name or even being certain of your gender makes it awkward to relate to you as a person. Could you talk to me about changing it to your real first name, please?

Second, while you have the right to any avatar you choose, the combination of your semi-anonymity and your somewhat confrontative style makes your choice of the Joker a little bit creepy, frankly. Are you wedded to that choice? Is it meaningful to you?

Please contact me by PM or Email at rgarr@louisvillehotbytes.com ... we need to talk about your forum participation.

"Second, while you have the right to any avatar you choose, the combination of your semi-anonymity and your somewhat confrontative style makes your choice of the Joker a little bit creepy, frankly. Are you wedded to that choice? Is it meaningful to you?

I thought that the avatar was the "Obama in Joker Face" you see pictured at various political rallies. Or am I wrong and its the "regular" joker?

[Robin Garr]

I thought that the avatar was the "Obama in Joker Face" you see pictured at various political rallies. Or am I wrong and its the "regular" joker?

Beats me. Creeps me out either way.

It's the Obama joker from the tea bagger rallies. Eh I just roll my eyes.

I agree with Robin, the avatar is a little creepy. What I finder creepier is the visual image of "tea-baggers", which has absolutely nothing to do with with politics....

[Robin Garr]

Recreational internet access on an Afghanistan US Military base is spotty.

Thanks for your service, J, and happy belated Memorial Day.

J's host IP number does not appear to support this locational assertion.