Thursday, September 6, 2007

Moving On...

Laura Hall's trial's over for now. If she's released on bond pending appeal, I'm sure that news will hit the mainstream wires/airwaves very quickly.

I might attend Robert Springsteen's (so-called "Yogurt Shop Murders") retrial, which seems to be scheduled for January 2008, assuming I 'm in a position to take off work then.

You, too, can train your cat to stay out of the kitchen while you fix her food! It's just not rocket science--cats aren't THAT much different than dogs in this department, at least. Here's what you should do: cat runs into kitchen to food bowl & begins meowing incessantly & loudly & you're barely AWAKE, fumbling w/the can opener as said cat meows even louder & more incessantly.

Scoop up cat and toss her (gently) out of the room while saying, "OUT!" several times as you do it. Cat will immediately try to run back in as you're trying not to cut your sleepy fingers on the tin cat-food lid, requiring you to drop everything, chase & scoop up the darling kitty again, tossing her out of the room w/a firm "OUT!" After the cat stays out of the room, you say, VERY enthusiastically, "OKAY!" The cat might be momentarily confused, but just steer her to her food as you repeat, "okay!"

You'll probably have to repeat this whole annoying routine several times, but I swear, darling kitty eventually catches on & will stay out of your hair while you fix her food. And I have a reformed-feral cat, so I know it can be done w/other cats. Just thought I'd share...

4 comments:

H.S. Lewis said...

Iris,

It was interesting to read your blog and hear about some of the things I missed at the trial. I noticed that no one has discussed the fact that someone can be convicted of tampering with evidence even though they personally did not touch the evidence. If someone encourages, promotes, aides, etc. then they are just as guilty as the person who actually commits the offense. If the trial had been about her handling hacksaws and body parts, she would have been acquited.

It is also intersting that there is such impatience with the jury. One might think that they took their time to make sure they all agreed and that the testimony reached the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt".

katmom said...

H.S. Lewis,

Do you believe LH is innocent of helping dismember Jennifer? Why would she brag about helping cut up a body, if she didn't do it? Or if she were scared? Why did she torment the Cave family w/ emails and IM's about Jennifer? What was her end game there? Did she just enjoy hurting people that have had their lives destroyed by a violent crime? Why?

Iris said...

h.s. lewis,

Thanks for reading & glad you've found it interesting. I agree that we should all be glad--and I am--that the jury took its job seriously & took the time it felt it needed. I apologize for being impatient: I was just tired of waiting around at those points.

I don't know what the exact legal wording is for the tampering w/evidence charge: I admit I sort of tuned out when the judge read the jury instructions to the jury.
--Iris

H.S. Lewis said...

Katmom,

I do not know if she is innocent of the physically handling the hacksaw or the machette or not. Under the law it does not matter, she is still guilty.

She may be cruel and she may be insane and she may be stupid. She may think she is sane and super intellegent. I am talking about what evidence there was presented at the trial. Given her past and the willingness/desire to seem tougher or colder, it would be reasonable to doubt her words. Add on the filter of other people recounting what they were told by her and thier motivation, you can easily get to reasonable doubt. The emails and IM's where not part of the trial, nor was much of what has been reported as fact in the media. I cannot understand how, if these items where so convincing and damming, why they were not part of the DA's case. Also, if you look at all of the phone calls made that day it suggests that they were apart more than they where together.

The DA seemed to know this and at the beginng was persuing the idea of her encouraging or promoting the crime. He is quoted as saying that he did not believe Colton's testimony when Colton said Laura was the one that worked on the body.

Even after that you may still not agree with the exact point of view that I have discussed. I would say that in the end we agree she is guilty.

People don't have to have an end game or a plan. Their motivation can be that they are angry, insane, bitter, abused, stupid, blind, twisted or somehow have a total lack of empathy for other humnas (detachement disorder).

If you watched her at conviction and sentencing it was clear she thought that she was not at risk of a felony or jail.

Iris,

Impatience is fine. I just hadn't considered it.