American Justice: Is it fair?

/in /by

There is a very interesting video segment on MSNBC today about the Horowitz murder. It’s a long segment, so to get to the point, move 3 minutes and 40 seconds into it and then play it.

A criminal prosecutor, Jonna Spilbor, takes on the role of the defending the accused young man in this case — and in attempting to “protect him” because we don’t know for sure if he or someone else killed Pamela Vitale — she does the only logical thing in our legal system: she attacks Horowitz.

How else can you legally defend someone in this situation?

Seriously?

She makes a great case to show the public how the legal system works. She makes you question Horowitz — even though she says herself she doesn’t think Horowitz did this. She is left with little else as she clearly states — baring that no DNA is found.

Imagine being appointed by the state to defend this guy. Imagine being his attorney — especially if you believe he is guilty (not that I am saying he is).

She gives you the chills at what she would have to do. She is clear, she makes you ask great questions, she makes you want to naturally question Horowitz. She gives you instant doubt!

It’s amazing how we can bend the truth — even what we believe — if we need to. This defense attorney is GOOD!

Doesn’t this seem to go against the attorneys sworn oath — that they will defend the truth at all costs? That is what the oath was meant to do — but when you look at the oath, you clearly see the loopholes — don’t you?

Ms. Jonna Spilbor sure points that out clearly. Doesn’t she?

What a flawed system.

* * *

On the Horowitz case, I must say that I am anxious to see if they find any substantial evidence that this young man actually did this. So far, we haven’t heard any to conclusively show us that HE did in fact kill Pamela Vitale. How do we know that there isn’t a killer at large still? I am hoping this poor guy gets a fair trial because the media and the police have unequivocally stated that Horowitz couldn’t possibly be the murderer — without taking any of the normal investigative avenues. The police have really dropped the ball in this case the way they handled Horowitz.

I don’t believe Horowitz killed his wife either. His face is genuine and honest and match his words, but regardless — it is really setting this case to be botched now matter what comes forward.

Murder on Grapevine Lake

/1 Comment/in /by

Last night, my husband and I were catching up on previously recorded TV shows, when we watched Saturday night’s CBS 48 Hours: Murder on Grapevine Lake.

David Nixon, a married man with a son from a previous marriage shows up dead — shot in the head and brutally burned to death on the side of the road. The question is who killed him?

60 minutes did a quick intro segment. They introduce you to his current wife, his son and his ex-wife. You aren’t able to tell who did it — because in the small segments, no one lies.

Then still within the first 2 to 3 minutes of the intro, they segway into a police interrogation tape. You can barely see it. It’s black and white, blurry, fuzzy and very small but as I listened to it, I quickly stated to my husband, “She lied.” His first wife did it — I declared.

My husband said, “No, that woman was his current wife.” He paused the DVR.

By the timing of the segment and the switching back and forth between intro pieces, I got confused about who was who. I thought the next person they were talking with was Donna, not Tracey.

Before my husband rewound the DVR, I said, “Whoever that is in the video tape — they are lying!!”

He replayed the tape, and he was right, it was Nixon’s second wife, Tracey.

Tracey sat in there in the police station and the police asked her two questions in this segment.

When they ask her these two questions, what caught my eye wasn’t her face. I couldn’t distinguish it. It was her response to the question that focused me in. I think they asked her “Why did you do this?” or something of that nature (unfortunately, they have entirely different footage on their website they didn’t even have on the show! so I can’t show you).

The first thing that Tracey did is what caught my eye. The second thing she did within seconds confirmed to me she was lying.

First she repeated the question the police asked her. Out loud. Then she turned on this winy baby-pout voice that sounded like poor-me-poor-me-I’m-being-picked-on-unfairly. You could hear she was playing the poor little hurt victim after the question even though she denied any involvement.

When you are being questioned for murder and you didn’t commit it, you don’t have the feel-sorry-for-me attitude. It doesn’t fit. It’s not normal or natural for adults.

Second, you don’t have to repeat the questions asked of you out loud. You heard the question or you don’t, and if you don’t — you ask for clarification. Many times people who lie — though NOT ALL PEOPLE who do this are liars — will repeat everything you say to them because they are trying to keep their lies straight. This behavior is a notable point, at best. Combine Tracey’s two behaviors — and bingo — you have a big tip-off.

Within the first couple of minutes, I had my answer about who was lying, but I didn’t know WHY.

We watched the rest of the show after that — and amazingly Tracey gave away more and more clues. Her eyes flashed a expression of glee at one point, she kept repeating questions asked of her, she stuttered, she couldn’t answer important questions.

Thankfully, at the end of the show, 48 Hours showed a jury convicting her! She is eligible to be out of prison in 20 years — at the age of 55. Now that is scary. This woman is a complete psychopath!

Analyzing Horowitz

/in /by

** I deleted this because it was announced on the day I posted this that there was an arrest in this case. I figured my timing was bad so this was useless to post.

I’ve seen a two interviews of Daniel Horowitz talking about his wife’s murder this past week. One on CNN and one on MSNBC.com.

Mr. Horowitz’s facial expressions, responses and answers are consistent in each of the videos I have seen. From the questions I have seen him answer, I do not believe he is a suspect.

Mr. Horowitz answered the questions he was asked — honestly.

I wish, however, someone would ask him OUT RIGHT if he murdered his wife, but I doubt I will see that because he is a known TV personality (Wouldn’t that be taboo?!).

Right now I stand at 85% confidence he is innocent of commiting a crime. If I see him answer the burning question of ‘Did you do it’, I can give a 100% certain answer.

Mr. Horowitz gives off genuine expressions of saddness about the loss of his wife, and genuine anger when he hears media-created lies.

I am also certain that Mr. Horowitz does not show any pathological traits.

Watch the interview here

Spot the Fake Smile

/in /by

____________________________

You’ve landed on the blog of a “natural”

as depicted in the show “Lie to Me”
____________________________

Take a test!

Test your skills. See if you can spot a fake smile!

It’s a challenging test.

* * *

I scored 15 out of 20 correct.

What did you score?

The Trial of Susan Polk

/in /by

Dateline NBC aired the story of Susan Polk on Friday night. Did you see it?

It was quite interesting because this case is in front of the jury right now as I write.

What is more fascinating is that MSNBC has an online poll asking viewers if they think Susan Polk murdered her husband or acted in self-defense.

Guess what?

69% of people believe Susan Polk acted in self-defense. Only 31% believe it was murder.

Quite surprising!!

I am certain Susan Polk acted out in murder. Count me in the minority.

I’ve only watched the first 1/2 of the show. I will be watching the 2nd half tonight on my DVR, but I have no doubt that my opinion will remain. I called out to my husband after seeing Susan speak for 30 seconds — “I don’t trust her. I don’t know why, but I don’t trust her.” And I haven’t swayed from that with all the information presented. In fact, the information has actually cemented my opinion even further.

Why am I so solid?? Because Susan was inconsistent in her speech. Her supposed actions didn’t match the character she is trying to portray.

According to Dateline, Susan Polk married Felix Polk — who was 25 years her senior when she was 25. They had three children. What Dateline hides from you early on is that Susan met Felix when she was in high school — when she was 15 and he was 40. She was introduced to Felix because he became her therapist. Susan was down, depressed and needed help — and according to Susan’s mother — Felix seemed to be the perfect antidote for her daughter — because she saw instant improvements in her daughter’s attitude and behavior after she visited with Dr. Polk. Susan’s mother firmly believed Dr. Polk was a great therapist.

Felix was married, but apparently made moves on Susan — and a relationship formed. When Susan was 25, TEN years after they met, he left his wife and family and married Susan.

Susan wants you to believe that she was “under Felix’s spell”, that she was unable to stand up to Felix — and hence she carried the burden around for years that she was molested and hence couldn’t handle it anymore. She says she wanted a divorce, but Felix refused. She says he wanted her forever and wouldn’t let her go — so he attacked her.

He attacked her — and hence she supposedly acted out in self-defense.

Susan wants you to believe that she was a mouse in their relationship, that she lived under the lies and control of Felix the entire marriage. And THAT is a lie.

Susan was once arrested for hitting her husband in front of police officers. Is that the behavior of a woman who “fears” her husband? Of a woman who lives under his control??

If Susan’s portrayal of herself was true and Felix controlled her as she says with a love-type potion, there wouldn’t have been the ‘War of the Polks’ as talked about by the children — a war that last years. It wouldn’t have been. When one partner is coerced, there isn’t war. Spats are small because the weak one always gives in, retreats and accepts things — maybe not happily — but there is NEVER A “WAR”.

Furthermore, others would have sensed that Susan was unhappy. Guess what? Her own mother didn’t have an INKLING that things were rough at home.

All of this is very inconsistent.

More than that, when Susan talks of the events, she is a blank slate emotionally. She doesn’t give the normal facial expressions, the reactions, the feelings that a “normal” and “honest” person would. She is devoid. She is devoid in this instance because she doesn’t feel the emotions behind her words. The words aren’t depicting her true emotions.

Susan also went away to college — she had plenty of time to “escape” Felix’s wrath — but instead she came back from college and went straight into his arms. It doesn’t add up no matter how you put it together.

One plus one should equal two and in this situation it never does. Susan is a patholigcal liar, and has been for years. She is warped, and mentally quite ill — if you ask me.

___________________________________
Edited 4-16-2007:
Susan Polk was convicted of second-degree murder in June of 2006.