Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2011, 12:19 PM
 
873 posts, read 1,795,673 times
Reputation: 480

Advertisements

I think time will tell that the wrong man got convicted and someone that should be in prison is still walking free. The defense attorney didn't do his job, in my opinion and there are so many unanswered questions. The jurors must have single digit IQs to have found this guy guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. What the hell did they think about the things around the girls neck that had someone else's DNA on it????? Duh! In a jury trial, the attorneys are salesmen, no more and no less. Whoever "sells" the jury wins, whether that's right or wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2011, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Up above the world so high!
45,218 posts, read 100,338,735 times
Reputation: 40195
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugguy View Post
I think time will tell that the wrong man got convicted and someone that should be in prison is still walking free. The defense attorney didn't do his job, in my opinion and there are so many unanswered questions. The jurors must have single digit IQs to have found this guy guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. What the hell did they think about the things around the girls neck that had someone else's DNA on it????? Duh! In a jury trial, the attorneys are salesmen, no more and no less. Whoever "sells" the jury wins, whether that's right or wrong.
I think it is very rude of you to say "the jurors have single digit IQ's to have found this guy guilty"

You weren't in the courtroom every day were you? And you surely weren't in the jury room as they went over all the evidence.

I'm sure they did the best job they could and deciding the fate of another human being is never an easy job to do. You should have some respect for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 04:52 PM
 
Location: Near the water
8,237 posts, read 13,456,519 times
Reputation: 3899
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains View Post
I think it is very rude of you to say "the jurors have single digit IQ's to have found this guy guilty"

You weren't in the courtroom every day were you? And you surely weren't in the jury room as they went over all the evidence.

I'm sure they did the best job they could and deciding the fate of another human being is never an easy job to do. You should have some respect for that.
It's not rude, it is true !
You can not find someone guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt when the "weapon" had another UN-IDENTIFIED persons DNA on it. No way! And if you do, then you aren't doing your job or your duty.

There was NO true evidence of this/these men doing this. Someone could get killed in the HT parking lot and your DNA be there because you were there previously. You may have brushed the car, buggy catch.....anything Would it be fair to be accused and then found guilty? Nope because you were innocent just as I think these men were/are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 05:10 PM
 
Location: Up above the world so high!
45,218 posts, read 100,338,735 times
Reputation: 40195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromekitty View Post
It's not rude, it is true !
You can not find someone guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt when the "weapon" had another UN-IDENTIFIED persons DNA on it. No way! And if you do, then you aren't doing your job or your duty.

There was NO true evidence of this/these men doing this. Someone could get killed in the HT parking lot and your DNA be there because you were there previously. You may have brushed the car, buggy catch.....anything Would it be fair to be accused and then found guilty? Nope because you were innocent just as I think these men were/are.

Unless you were in the courtroom every day and the jury deliberation room you really do not know every single fact that was presented.

Do I think the man got great representation? NO.

But you can't blame the jurors for doing the best they could with the evidence they had.

Surely SOMETHIING we don't know about convinced them of the mans guilt. Calling them names IS rude and uncalled for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Up above the world so high!
45,218 posts, read 100,338,735 times
Reputation: 40195
The juror quoted in paper said the DNA evidence convinced them.

Juror: DNA proved guilt convincingly - CharlotteObserver.com (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/22/2162096/juror-dna-proved-guilt-convincingly.html - broken link)

"I didn't see anything thin about the evidence at all," said juror Warren Newsom. "The evidence weighed against Mr. Carver. I feel very comfortable about the verdict. It's the only one I could come to."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 05:36 PM
 
810 posts, read 2,283,179 times
Reputation: 466
If I've read it right, both the suspects DNA in her car, both denying they were ever in the car seems like pretty strong evidence. This case is strange, I just do not understand the motive. Seems like a confrontation or a simple assault gone very wrong. If I were a family member I don't think this conviction would give me closure. Rest Well Ms. Yarmolenko.



Thanks for the link Loves, you snuck that one in as I was typing mine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 05:43 PM
 
Location: Near the water
8,237 posts, read 13,456,519 times
Reputation: 3899
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains View Post
Unless you were in the courtroom every day and the jury deliberation room you really do not know every single fact that was presented.

Do I think the man got great representation? NO.

But you can't blame the jurors for doing the best they could with the evidence they had.

Surely SOMETHIING we don't know about convinced them of the mans guilt. Calling them names IS rude and uncalled for.

I do blame them because I don't think they did their job properly.
You can't convict on that evidence. If so then everyone best stay home because your DNA may be found on a crime scene.Hopefully he will fair better on appeal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2011, 02:15 AM
 
873 posts, read 1,795,673 times
Reputation: 480
What's even more "rude and uncalled for" would be sending an innocent man to prison for the rest of his life! And you're right! I don't know "every single fact that was presented". But from all the accounts that I've read, there really weren't many actual "facts" presented!!

According to The Charlotte Observer,
"DNA had been found on Yarmolenko's car but not on her body or on the bindings used to kill her. In the two days of testimony, prosecutors brought no witnesses to the killing and little discussion of any motive until suggesting during closing arguments that Yarmolenko may have photographed something Carver didn't want on film.
"This was one of the toughest cases I've ever worked," prosecutor Bill Stetzer told the Observer. "The DNA evidence conclusively placed him at the scene not far from the victim's body. But his DNA was not found on the murder weapons. " How did the prosecution put the murder weapons in his hand and show that he used them??? Just tell me that! Because without evidence that placed those weapons in his hand beyond a reasonable doubt, there should have been no conviction. Even the supposed "motive" presented to the jury was nothing but speculation with nothing to back it up!!!

The crime scene was a public access. I would be curious as to just how many different DNA samples were obtained there!

I think the DA wanted to close this case, just as too many others are closed, and this is why we read so often of innocent people that have spent years, even decades in prison! That's wrong! (Being rude when a miscarriage of justice is taking place is one of my strong points!)



Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains View Post
Unless you were in the courtroom every day and the jury deliberation room you really do not know every single fact that was presented.

Do I think the man got great representation? NO.

But you can't blame the jurors for doing the best they could with the evidence they had.

Surely SOMETHIING we don't know about convinced them of the mans guilt. Calling them names IS rude and uncalled for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2011, 04:45 PM
 
1,343 posts, read 3,320,683 times
Reputation: 981
Here is another little thing that is bugging me. The prosecution presents this purely speculative motive, that Ms Yarmolenko photographed the men doing something they didn't want her to photograph. (Holy innuendo! Were these guys doing something naughty to each other?)

But I digress.. It was stated that the film had been removed from the camera, but the camera's counter indicated that 2 pictures had been taken. Well, every SLR film camera that I have seen the counter resets when you open the back and remove the film. So, 1. What's that got to do with anything? and, 2. Where is the film anyway?

I don't fault the defense for resting without saying anything. They honestly felt the prosecution had not made a case. I believe that is what you are supposed to do when the prosecution does not make a case. Maybe they even expected the judge to mandate a not guilty verdict due to lack of evidence. I will not be surprised if the conviction is overturned on appeal.

Do I "think" he did it? Yes, maybe... maybe even probably, but not beyond a reasonable doubt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Charlotte
2,445 posts, read 7,421,907 times
Reputation: 1405
Tomorrow Friday, July 8th the second hour of Dateline will cover the case.

Dateline NBC features Gaston County murder case Friday (http://www.gastongazette.com/news/nbc-58930-gaston-hour.html - broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top