Hannah’s husband posted on here she wasn’t there that night. I’m doubtful ZD would testify and implicate BM. I may be wrong but it would shock me considering how close they were. One thing is for certain... somebody is lying out of all of those names. The big question is who?
@skid or anyone else, could be more specific about what you want boiled down? I would not mind giving an opinion on most things
Nacho I would love to know if you feel there is any strategy by the DA to try Bo first in Wilcox. Seemed odd to me.
I’m unsure to be short. The DAs could have coordinated to free up Bo to testify in Ryan’s case. With this jurisdiction clearing up Bo’s only other case in connection to Tara there would not be an impedance to his testimony in Ryan’s murder trial. If that’s not the case, as is totally possible, it just very well could be that his time for trial is coincidentally just before Ryan’s. We all know there have been a few delays in Ryan’s trial so if those had not happened this question would be mute. As to Bo’s charges in Ben Hill County for concealment and disposing of a body I believe local LE ‘s imprudence played the most unambiguous hinderance to why neither man will face charges in that county for what both men have claimed took place in the orchard. In summary a strategy might have sped Bo’s charges up but I haven’t seen anything that leads me to believe that was directly the case. Sometimes it’s just your day in court 🤷🏻♂️
@undersea ..... you say above , if only a third person could validate one of their alibis....... that guy is deceased
@Dawg4 I’m not sure you’re presenting an accurate statement about AM, or for that matter the prosecution, asking Stephen about how was in the trailer that night in the bond hearing. Feel free to check for yourself. (There are no breaks in the feed and Stephen is on the stand for roughly 25 mins from 8:00 - 33:00) https://youtu.be/JnyepgCxa78 This has been Stephen’s only appearance in court for this case so it would seem to be that you have things a lil jumbled up as to what was said in open court and under oath. Now.... AM while cross examining Agent Shoudel reads from a written statement Bo had made and given to LE when he was interviewed 2 days prior to Ryan’s confession. Bo alleges that himself, Ryan Stephen, Ben, Zane, and Hannah were at a party together the night of Tara’s disappearance. https://youtu.be/aklOO_dRJ3c That can be referenced here from roughly 19:00 - 24:00 Hope that helps clear things up a little
Very convenient indeed to use a dead man to cast reasonable doubt..
Great discussion on “the alibi”. I had similar observations of Stephen’s sworn testimony during the bond hearing and we discussed his testimony but not as thoroughly as has been done here. My impression was he was/is credible/genuine - and understandably anxious. It was his testimony he did not recall where he was that evening - was “told he was there”. Told by who? I don’t think he has been interacting with Bo so - my guess is - Ryan. Which supports my belief Ryan remembers/knows the details of that dreadful evening. Anyway I commented post-bond hearing and will repeat .. the gloves will come off on Stephen at trial. The prosecution handled him with a light touch at the bond hearing as it should have been (considering the purpose of Stephen’s testimony bond... which was defense tactic they knew would not be granted). We learned at the bond hearing Stephen is NOT ‘the alibi’. JMO. I’m not sure what the alibi is unless Ryan intends to get on the stand and tell his account of the night because Stephen doesn’t remember being there. I don’t think Ryan will testify but - he might🤷🏻♀️ ⚖️Justice For Tara
Anyone else think the state has set aside any concerns for appeal and focusing on THIS trial? In other words - let the cards fall where they may. As each motion is declined my sense increases to little/no appeal concern. And if that is the case - and if Ryan were convicted, do you think the Merchants will continue handling Ryan’s case (appeal/s)? Just curious for thoughts. OK I’m swamped and will read mostly vs. post but appreciate the discussions!
It definitely seems like the state is just focusing on this trial and letting the appeal opportunity chips fall where they may. I 100% agree with SD testimony, if he gets in the stand to corroborate the alibi, the state will pick him apart and use his he bond hearing against him. Maybe they’re gonna play ball and throw Ryan up there? Doesn’t seem like a good idea... but it’s a possibility.
Questions: Where they asleep or passed out? Why didn't Stephen offer up this information earlier? or at least after the gag order was lifted? He's the brother that wouldn't talk to Payne, seems like he now has some sort of information. He's at least another person who could've said something back in 2005. R.I.P. Ben M. Hope you are innocent as you're not here to defend yourself. If you did know something, hopefully you told someone and those people can find the courage to come forward and tell the truth.
How might Ryan’s defense intend to support “I was at home asleep (and so was Stephen.. and Ben and Bo left,the house together)”? Is that what is being suggested? Serious question. Doesn’t someone have to corroborate an alibi in order for there to be an “alibi”? Stephen has sworn he does not recall where he was on that date - so he can’t corroborate. Ben is deceased, Hannah (according to husband) says she was not there. So we’re left with Bo (not gonna happen), Ryan testifying (doubtful), Zane, the possible police report documenting pulling Ben over (which at this point is speculation - but even if it occurred - he could’ve been going home.. was it recorded Bo was with him.. still wouldn’t prove anything). If Ryan was asleep ..then how would he know they left? I’m sure the defense has something to suggest or can they file this type of claim with no one to corroborate. Are we gonna hear Stephen say “that’s what I was told”? I don’t think that would fly.
That's Bo's alibi, too. In other words, we're not getting the truth from either one. I think the alibi is intentionally vague in the motion because the defense doesn't want to show all its cards going into Bo's trial in Wilcox County. I think Bo will try to establish his version during this trial (I think that's probably why we're having this trial) before Ryan's, so the motion, I think, was an attempt to establish Ryan's story before Bo's without giving away too many details.
Ahh I gotcha @umdersea🧐 I hope Bo’s trial is livestreamed on Monday!
Just don’t want to see that lard of lies. Audio version please. Hurts my eyes. 🙈—>👺