A home for those seeking to share and search for justice in the Jane Bashara murder!
migraine wrote:Amy Lange reporting that she saw Jessica and Robert Bashara (Bob's children). She is speculating that they will be testifying today. Poor things!
chewet wrote:migraine wrote:Amy Lange reporting that she saw Jessica and Robert Bashara (Bob's children). She is speculating that they will be testifying today. Poor things!
It sickens me that any "parent" could and would put his children through this!!! Plead guilty and save them from this horror!!
Last edited by EllsBells on Thu 23 Oct 2014, 5:35 pm; edited 1 time in total
Last edited by EllsBells on Thu 23 Oct 2014, 4:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
meandmyshadow wrote:We ALL know that "Giving the rest to Grandma" is a euphemism for "Giving the rest to BOB" ! Give me a freaking break! The jurors don't know this yet, but they will! Oh they will learn about evil henchwoman Nancy and her side sick...
AnalyzeThis wrote:At the rate this trial is progressing, it will be ages before I need the answer to this, but I'm curious about what it will take to put BB away forever with no hope of parole. What needs to be proven for him to be convicted of First Degree Premeditated Murder? Does he need to have been there? Been part of the physical murder? Or is it enough that he planned it?
Sorry if this has been discussed already at some point.
EllsBells wrote:
Actually the charge is conspiracy to commit murder --- he could have been on the other side of the moon when the murder happened, as long as they can prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) he planned it, he'll be locked away for good.
Then there are the other charges such as obstruction and witness tampering, which seem much more straightforward to prove, that also carry long prison terms.
AnalyzeThis wrote:EllsBells wrote:
Actually the charge is conspiracy to commit murder --- he could have been on the other side of the moon when the murder happened, as long as they can prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) he planned it, he'll be locked away for good.
Then there are the other charges such as obstruction and witness tampering, which seem much more straightforward to prove, that also carry long prison terms.
I believe he's also been charged with first degree murder:
http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/wayne-county/opening-statements-today-in-bob-basharas-murder-trial
Judge Evans began the hearing by reading the charges against Bob Bashara to the jury. They include First Degree Premeditated Murder (automatic life in prison), plus Solicitation of Murder, Obstruction of Justice, Witness Intimidation and Subordination of Perjury.
AnalyzeThis wrote:I'm surprised none of the news stations have had attorneys comment on this. Anything I could find by searching wasn't clear.
Joe's story was that Bob forced him to murder Jane at gunpoint, wasn't it? It seems like that would constitute First Degree Murder (on BB's part), but of course "seems like" is meaningless. But even if it wasn't at gunpoint, if Bob planned it and Bob was there, Joe becomes the murder weapon so to speak. But would love to hear a knowledgeable legal opinion on this charge and the evidence needed to support it.
AnalyzeThis wrote:At the rate this trial is progressing, it will be ages before I need the answer to this, but I'm curious about what it will take to put BB away forever with no hope of parole. What needs to be proven for him to be convicted of First Degree Premeditated Murder? Does he need to have been there? Been part of the physical murder? Or is it enough that he planned it?
Sorry if this has been discussed already at some point.
EllsBells wrote:AnalyzeThis wrote:I'm surprised none of the news stations have had attorneys comment on this. Anything I could find by searching wasn't clear.
Joe's story was that Bob forced him to murder Jane at gunpoint, wasn't it? It seems like that would constitute First Degree Murder (on BB's part), but of course "seems like" is meaningless. But even if it wasn't at gunpoint, if Bob planned it and Bob was there, Joe becomes the murder weapon so to speak. But would love to hear a knowledgeable legal opinion on this charge and the evidence needed to support it.
I too would like to hear more from legal analysts, there seemed to be more of that in the media prior to trial.
I agree, it could well be that the (alleged) matter of Bob forcing Joe at gunpoint is what makes this First Degree by meeting the 'intentionally causing' criteria, irrespective of planning or conspiring.
It does seem a gun's use is going to be hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt without Joes's testimony as judged believable by the jury. Only 3 people knew whether a gun was used or not --- and one can't testify, one won't, and one is not believable if he does.
It does help enormously that Mr. Big Mouth lied on national tv that he didn't own a gun when in fact he had an unregistered one and then went to great lengths to hide it. After all, why get an unregistered gun, lie about it, and then hide it if you're not afraid that it would corroborate Joe's version? He would have been better off claiming, "Yes I own a registered gun, but that does not prove using it on Gentz." It looks much less guilty that way, but basically imo that alone does not meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
Then again, probably the jury realizes by now "if Bob's mouth is moving, then he's lying" and won't give him any benefit of the doubt.
Pointed Barbs wrote:I believe that All of Joe's testimony can be used.More important though is the fact that Bob's conviction shows him willing and able to hire some one to kill someone else...this supports the contention that he did that with Jane.He will be convicted for his own evil.
As for how long he stays in prison,The first time he tries the good old boy Mayor of Cell block E bullshit rap of his...someone will doubtless shank him with a sharpened toothbrush...Master Bob won't find things so sweet swimming with the big fishes...
Perhaps they'll also teach him to find his inner submissive...
smallal wrote:
Here is one more legal question. It is public knowledge that the Blob is serving time for soliciting a hit on JG. However, I do not think they can mention his current status (convicted criminal) in the trial or for what reason he is currently serving time. Thus, you see him in street clothes rather than prison garb. I think its considered prejudicial to even mention the fact he is currently incarcerated. I may be wrong but sure would appreciate some clarification from a legal expert.
EllsBells wrote:smallal wrote:
Here is one more legal question. It is public knowledge that the Blob is serving time for soliciting a hit on JG. However, I do not think they can mention his current status (convicted criminal) in the trial or for what reason he is currently serving time. Thus, you see him in street clothes rather than prison garb. I think its considered prejudicial to even mention the fact he is currently incarcerated. I may be wrong but sure would appreciate some clarification from a legal expert.
In their opening statements both Lindsey and Diallo mentioned that BB had pled guilty to hiring a hitman to kill Gentz.
"Lindsey played his plea in court (during opening statements), "I foolishly and regrettably plead guilty to trying to hire a hitman" Bashara told the judge in that case."
http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/wayne-county/opening-statements-today-in-bob-basharas-murder-trial
[As an aside: If the wxyz quote is an accurate one, BB is actually saying he regrets the foolishness of pleading guilty, not that he regrets the foolishness of trying to hire a hitman. Hmm ... typical BB doublespeak]
Obviously he is being led in and out of court by uniformed guards, so the jury could figure he's still incarcerated. I think it's the optics of seeing someone in prison clothes that is deemed prejudicial, not knowing that he's committed a crime.
Of course Bob knows who he was yelling "do it now, do it now" on the phone while in Oregon. The defense contends it wasn't Gentz, but what are the odds that they put someone else on the stand who says he was the person talking to Bob? If they don't, isn't the logical conclusion that he was indeed talking to Gentz?
Last edited by smallal on Fri 24 Oct 2014, 3:23 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : added link)
Pointed Barbs wrote:I believe that All of Joe's testimony can be used.More important though is the fact that Bob's conviction shows him willing and able to hire some one to kill someone else...this supports the contention that he did that with Jane.He will be convicted for his own evil.
As for how long he stays in prison,The first time he tries the good old boy Mayor of Cell block E bullshit rap of his...someone will doubtless shank him with a sharpened toothbrush...Master Bob won't find things so sweet swimming with the big fishes...
Perhaps they'll also teach him to find his inner submissive...
EllsBells wrote:smallal wrote:
Here is one more legal question. It is public knowledge that the Blob is serving time for soliciting a hit on JG. However, I do not think they can mention his current status (convicted criminal) in the trial or for what reason he is currently serving time. Thus, you see him in street clothes rather than prison garb. I think its considered prejudicial to even mention the fact he is currently incarcerated. I may be wrong but sure would appreciate some clarification from a legal expert.
In their opening statements both Lindsey and Diallo mentioned that BB had pled guilty to hiring a hitman to kill Gentz.
"Lindsey played his plea in court (during opening statements), "I foolishly and regrettably plead guilty to trying to hire a hitman" Bashara told the judge in that case."
http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/wayne-county/opening-statements-today-in-bob-basharas-murder-trial
[As an aside: If the wxyz quote is an accurate one, BB is actually saying he regrets the foolishness of pleading guilty, not that he regrets the foolishness of trying to hire a hitman. Hmm ... typical BB doublespeak]
Obviously he is being led in and out of court by uniformed guards, so the jury could figure he's still incarcerated. I think it's the optics of seeing someone in prison clothes that is deemed prejudicial, not knowing that he's committed a crime.
Of course Bob knows who he was yelling "do it now, do it now" on the phone while in Oregon. The defense contends it wasn't Gentz, but what are the odds that they put someone else on the stand who says he was the person talking to Bob? If they don't, isn't the logical conclusion that he was indeed talking to Gentz?
smallal wrote:EllsBells wrote:smallal wrote:
Here is one more legal question. It is public knowledge that the Blob is serving time for soliciting a hit on JG. However, I do not think they can mention his current status (convicted criminal) in the trial or for what reason he is currently serving time. Thus, you see him in street clothes rather than prison garb. I think its considered prejudicial to even mention the fact he is currently incarcerated. I may be wrong but sure would appreciate some clarification from a legal expert.
In their opening statements both Lindsey and Diallo mentioned that BB had pled guilty to hiring a hitman to kill Gentz.
"Lindsey played his plea in court (during opening statements), "I foolishly and regrettably plead guilty to trying to hire a hitman" Bashara told the judge in that case."
http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/wayne-county/opening-statements-today-in-bob-basharas-murder-trial
[As an aside: If the wxyz quote is an accurate one, BB is actually saying he regrets the foolishness of pleading guilty, not that he regrets the foolishness of trying to hire a hitman. Hmm ... typical BB doublespeak]
Obviously he is being led in and out of court by uniformed guards, so the jury could figure he's still incarcerated. I think it's the optics of seeing someone in prison clothes that is deemed prejudicial, not knowing that he's committed a crime.
Of course Bob knows who he was yelling "do it now, do it now" on the phone while in Oregon. The defense contends it wasn't Gentz, but what are the odds that they put someone else on the stand who says he was the person talking to Bob? If they don't, isn't the logical conclusion that he was indeed talking to Gentz?
Thanks for clarification. I went back and watched the opening again. The most annoying thing is how much disrespect and distraction Lillian Diallo presents during Lisa Lindsay's opening. Around 5:30 she moves her chair to block Lisa, at 8:30 she moves another chair, is constantly shaking her head, acting as if she is taking notes, opening and closing her tablet, just really agitating and annoying. Anyone else notice this ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1Jk-G7-ygA
wwjd wrote:I'm no lawyer, but from the testimony we've heard so far it's not looking good for big Bob. It's a shame Jane's kids had to testify, but from them the jury learned about his financial motive among other things. We have several more witnesses to hear from. I'm thinking by the time the prosecution is done, he'll be convicted. Jmho
Pointed Barbs wrote:I believe that All of Joe's testimony can be used.More important though is the fact that Bob's conviction shows him willing and able to hire some one to kill someone else...this supports the contention that he did that with Jane.He will be convicted for his own evil.
As for how long he stays in prison,The first time he tries the good old boy Mayor of Cell block E bullshit rap of his...someone will doubtless shank him with a sharpened toothbrush...Master Bob won't find things so sweet swimming with the big fishes...
Perhaps they'll also teach him to find his inner submissive...
wwjd wrote:I'm no lawyer, but from the testimony we've heard so far it's not looking good for big Bob. It's a shame Jane's kids had to testify, but from them the jury learned about his financial motive among other things.
Last edited by EllsBells on Mon 27 Oct 2014, 3:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
chewet wrote:Thanks for the links, Analyze!
From Fox 2 blog:
"Amy Lange: Good morning!!! Hope everybody had a great weekend! We are just getting settled in here - photographers setting up, detectives bringing in boxes of evidence in brown bags, attorneys starting to file in. This is the third week of testimony and the prosecution has more than 80 witnesses on their witness list - we've been through 20-some so I'm told the judge has told the attorneys it's time to pick up the pace. I'm told a number of witnesses could be called this week - from a furniture store owner Bashara tried to pay to hire a hitman to kill Joseph Gentz to a former tenant of Bashara's to the sister and mother of Jane Bashara. There are also a number of witnesses who were here last week but were not called yet so it's unclear who is going when - will let you know as soon as the first witness takes the stand!
bbm
Well geez!!! How can anyone be told to "pick up the pace" when court STARTS at 10-10:30, breaks for 1/2 an hour at 11, takes two hour lunches, then tells everyone testimony is done for the day at 3 - 3:30?? Not to mention no Fridays, missing days willy nilly, blah blah blah. Come on-- this is NOT the attorneys' issue... Smh.
smallal wrote:Greetings,
The introduction of Blob to JG was in 2011 ? Through Steve, just after Blob asked him if he knew anyone that would T-Bone a tennant ? And Steve tells him JG would make a good "handyman" ? Was that with a wink wink ? I thought Blob and JG had known each other from some bowling league or card playing entertainment a few years prior. Why was there no blogging about the second hour long tape being played. IMO, the first tape seemed to support Blob's and the defense theory about JG going off. This portion seemed fragmented, I kept waiting for the prosecution to get to the point. Or perhaps the point was just showing Blob's capability of being oblivious to any consequences of his actions. Anyone else feel like they were waiting for something meaningful to be added ? All I got was the timing of suggesting JG work for the Blob after Steve offers 2 cops and an Albanian.
EllsBells wrote:smallal wrote:Greetings,
The introduction of Blob to JG was in 2011 ? Through Steve, just after Blob asked him if he knew anyone that would T-Bone a tennant ? And Steve tells him JG would make a good "handyman" ? Was that with a wink wink ? I thought Blob and JG had known each other from some bowling league or card playing entertainment a few years prior. Why was there no blogging about the second hour long tape being played. IMO, the first tape seemed to support Blob's and the defense theory about JG going off. This portion seemed fragmented, I kept waiting for the prosecution to get to the point. Or perhaps the point was just showing Blob's capability of being oblivious to any consequences of his actions. Anyone else feel like they were waiting for something meaningful to be added ? All I got was the timing of suggesting JG work for the Blob after Steve offers 2 cops and an Albanian.
I agree, Smallal, kept waiting for the one-two punch which never came. It seemed to be a more subtle point that Bob was looking for a hitman in Oct. '11 and Gentz was referred in Nov. to him which BB likely took as the requested hit guy. Also got out more corroboration of other witnesses that BB was shopping everywhere for a hitman and supports Gentz statements of BB wanting to t-bone someone. Bonus points: Blob is a sleaze who welches on debts and cheats people (i.e. rejected refrig. not Steve's).
As to BB's denials of hiring JG to murder Jane, the jury at this point probably doesn't believe a word he says.
Wonder if the defense to create doubt can find a tenant of Bob's who WAS beaten up during this time frame, deflecting away from Jane as the target ... Ha, that'll be the day.
Also, who is the mystery woman in the gallery that Blob turns and smiles at every day, per some bloggers?
smallal wrote:Greetings,
The introduction of Blob to JG was in 2011 ? Through Steve, just after Blob asked him if he knew anyone that would T-Bone a tennant ? And Steve tells him JG would make a good "handyman" ? Was that with a wink wink ? I thought Blob and JG had known each other from some bowling league or card playing entertainment a few years prior. Why was there no blogging about the second hour long tape being played. IMO, the first tape seemed to support Blob's and the defense theory about JG going off. This portion seemed fragmented, I kept waiting for the prosecution to get to the point. Or perhaps the point was just showing Blob's capability of being oblivious to any consequences of his actions. Anyone else feel like they were waiting for something meaningful to be added ? All I got was the timing of suggesting JG work for the Blob after Steve offers 2 cops and an Albanian.
Last edited by smallal on Mon 27 Oct 2014, 6:13 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : added last thought)
smallal wrote:What did Steve get out of wearing the wire and setting up the Blob ? Probably immunity from being charged as an accessory in providing the weapon(JG) to the Blob.
Bricktop wrote:I think you're right, Kitty. I also think that Steve is just a normal guy. Who, of us, wouldn't have gone to the police with something like this?!
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|