07-27-2012, 12:18 AM
It was an eventful day & most are focused on what Williams jury will do and Pettaway's acquittal, I've followed this so long have wondered so much like a lot of other mockers have...just wanted to get a few more details out that I found interesting from Pettaway's trial before the lunch break and then aquittal.
During cross-exam of Det Kozak, used certificates of title to show that JC bought his car from a dealership with another person (I think it was his grandfather) also listed on title - car had just under 30k miles. Six months later, car title changed to J.C. & L.S., mileage was 105k --- that's 75k in 6 months. (defense trying to establish Johnny was a dealer).
They talked about investigation of AP (earlier during direct Det K said AP was investigated and cleared) - Defense asked Det K to confirm AP had a prior prison record - objection made & overruled. Then he asked Det K to verify that AP wasn't in custody at time of murders (he wasn't). He said AP's in prison now on new robbery charge, he's not a nice guy -- objection & sustained.
BUT here's the part about AP I couldn't believe--- Defense asked how he cleared AP -- when Det K didn't really offer anything, Defense asked if it was on the basis of Matt Yockey. Det K confirmed that essentially cleared AP because MY came down to station voluntarily on 1⁄31 and gave an alibi for AP, which was that AP was hanging out with MY that night and said that AP was on the phone arguing with TW most of the evening.
Honestly --- if that's how they cleared AP, I just about give up. I put way too much faith in the investigation.
Defense went through a list of other suspects, many who've been mentioned at some point on here ---often Det K couldn't remember much about them or why he investigated them or asked for DNA --when he remembered it was usually because they were related to/associates of Sam/Cam, or because someone else told them they should check so & so. Made it look like there was no actual strategy. For one of the names, detective wasn't even sure if it was a he/she. Also, found it unbelievable that at least once, a witness came forward with information blaming other people including details of the crime (said he overheard when he was arrested) & they didn't even bother to take his DNA just everyone else except person bringing info. Man, this testimony was disappointing.
I'm running out of room so will finish on another post (almost done, just need to get the rest of this out & off my mind tonight, sorry for posting so much)
During cross-exam of Det Kozak, used certificates of title to show that JC bought his car from a dealership with another person (I think it was his grandfather) also listed on title - car had just under 30k miles. Six months later, car title changed to J.C. & L.S., mileage was 105k --- that's 75k in 6 months. (defense trying to establish Johnny was a dealer).
They talked about investigation of AP (earlier during direct Det K said AP was investigated and cleared) - Defense asked Det K to confirm AP had a prior prison record - objection made & overruled. Then he asked Det K to verify that AP wasn't in custody at time of murders (he wasn't). He said AP's in prison now on new robbery charge, he's not a nice guy -- objection & sustained.
BUT here's the part about AP I couldn't believe--- Defense asked how he cleared AP -- when Det K didn't really offer anything, Defense asked if it was on the basis of Matt Yockey. Det K confirmed that essentially cleared AP because MY came down to station voluntarily on 1⁄31 and gave an alibi for AP, which was that AP was hanging out with MY that night and said that AP was on the phone arguing with TW most of the evening.
Honestly --- if that's how they cleared AP, I just about give up. I put way too much faith in the investigation.
Defense went through a list of other suspects, many who've been mentioned at some point on here ---often Det K couldn't remember much about them or why he investigated them or asked for DNA --when he remembered it was usually because they were related to/associates of Sam/Cam, or because someone else told them they should check so & so. Made it look like there was no actual strategy. For one of the names, detective wasn't even sure if it was a he/she. Also, found it unbelievable that at least once, a witness came forward with information blaming other people including details of the crime (said he overheard when he was arrested) & they didn't even bother to take his DNA just everyone else except person bringing info. Man, this testimony was disappointing.
I'm running out of room so will finish on another post (almost done, just need to get the rest of this out & off my mind tonight, sorry for posting so much)