stop it. @Gerogia- thats a great question- I'll be watching for the answer.
@ga, I think he could only be convicted for what is left (murder). If the SOL is proven on those other charges, then he won't be convicted on those other charges.
@georgia they’re echnically not severed, they still happened but cannot be prosecuted if the SOL have been surpassed
Do you feel it is a valid argument?
Hmmm. I don't know. I guess it depends on how it's argued. I figure the state will argue that they only received the knowledge in 2017, but the defense will argue that the GBI had the knowledge as far back as at least 2008 and bumbled it.
@ Cat, I think we need to get Nacho and Willy one of those "OUR GET ALONG SHIRT"!!!! 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😜😜
@georgia in this particular scenario NO. I understand why SOL exist, say for instance a misdemeanor crime you committed when you were a kid could then potentially land you in jail in your 40’s or 50’s. That would be silly. Any crimes connected to a rape, murder or intentional maiming should not have SOL. Laws are laws though
Meh he just mad I have not told him stuff 😜😂
Like the fact that the 'peanut slinger' is mentioned in the motions filed?
I mean, I didn't wanna say it but being that you did....yep...but let's still chalk it up as local rumor 🙄
@whynow Wouldn’t it be a wonderful surprise if we actually get to the truth of what actually happened!!!! Yes!!
@blackmaerlyn reading from my phone and can’t see too well! what did it say?
So here we have it.. finally what so many of us have suspected for ages.. the drunken confession at a party was not exclusively from Ryan and Bo was right there front and centre. But now we know 2 things for a fact: 1) there was a cover up at a local level - due to incompetence at best or worst familial connections and 2) there’s been a concerted effort fmrom Bo’s camp to carve out a story and timeline that is completely false.
You said it, @maisymouse.
@maisy, based on whatever was said during the Wickr conversations, does any of this align with what was revealed during that conversation?
@undersea Bo ran with the same story there too. It’s probably more significant what he didn’t say than what he did say. He’s treading a fine line.. on the one hand he is distancing himself as much as possible from the actual crime but on the other hand the SOL on his current charges are an issue now that it is ofiicial that he was questioned back in 2005. We knew Ryan was questioned back in 2005 based on that tip but now we know Bo was too. The significance of this is that Bo is the key witness in this trial and now it appears that he was at some point a suspect (person of interest). We can debate how much of a suspect he was at that time but that fact has to affect his credibility as a witness. No wonder the defense are asking for deals to be revealed.
NP amd Morgan have got some explaining to do 🤔. And another thing that is strange is that Garland said he was never interviewed about his information until 2017 yet he and his employers were scampering around an orchard “searching” with 2 law enforcement officers...but they didn’t interview him. How many locals knew about what happened all those years ago. All those at that party knew.
RIGHT ON maisymouse!!!! RIGHT ON
@maisymouse-you took the words right out of my mouth!! This is exactly what I hoped would happen-broken leads and ultimately the truth was in the giant files(it is still the largest case file in GBI history to date).