pierce, wellborn, scott and springsteen but then you cut them loose. why? we got to the point we couldn t go any further with them. we brought them in because maurice got caught with a .22 caliber pistol within three or four blocks of the crea crime . we weren t able to do anything on the ballistics to match it up. in the briefing maurice implicated the other three. so we were under an obligation to investigate his statement. we wired up maurice and he met with a wire to go talk to a couple of the others. it was pretty obvious for us and it was is pretty obvious listening to the wire that forest didn t have any idea what he was talking about but we went ahead and brought them all in, took statements from them and investigated them as far as we could go, as far as we could match up with what evidence we had and just reached the point we couldn t
interrogation that he got scared and basically he told them what h they wanted to hear and he believed he was involved involvement. come up with a judge jeanine: how is it that he was threatened. it was is a subtle threat and to give context to this. this case was tried in 2002. i missed the threat but here was what the threat was. he was told look we know you are involved in the crime and that is going to happen you know what a grand jury is we will take you to a grand jury and we are going to tell them what we know and you know that if you lie to them you are are going to go to jail or prison. judge jeanine: what i don t understand. is he when came in aa cording to the court record said that i have now confessed to my father and my best friend patrick davidson before he actually confessed to police. i mean doesn t that have a ring of truth to it it? i already told my father i did
how does a guy know that she didn t die from the .22 to her head? unless he was at the crime scene. as far as the fifth person was concerned if there was a fifth person that doesn t take them out of the picture not at all. the defense is going to say two things. a, he was fed that information and b, he had reason to know what that information was or acquire it later on. and therefore they are going to use that. judge jeanine: as the a. i will come back and say prove to me it was said because it was on videotape and you objected because it was a videotape. next, your help is needed. it could lead to the killer of a former model. why not make lunch more than just lunch?
didn t die from the .22 to her head? unless he was at the crime scene. as far as the fifth person was concerned if there was a fifth person that doesn t take them out of the picture not at all. the defense is going to say two things. a, he was fed that information and b, he had reason to know what that information was or acquire it later on. and therefore they are going to use that. judge jeanine: as the a. i will come back and say prove to me it was said because it was on videotape and you objected because it was a videotape. next, your help is needed. it could lead to the killer of a former model.
interrogation that he got scared and basically he told them what h they wanted to hear and he believed he was involved but couldn t come up with a memory of involvement. judge jeanine: how is it that he was threatened. it was is a subtle threat and to give context to this. this case was tried in 2002. i missed the threat but here was what the threat was. he was told look we know you are involved in the crime and that is going to happen you know what a grand jury is we will take you to a grand jury and we are going to tell them what we know and you know that if you lie to them you are are going to go to jail or prison. judge jeanine: what i don t understand. is he when came in aa cording to the court record said that i have now confessed to my father and my best friend patrick davidson before he actually confessed to police. i mean doesn t that have a ring of truth to it it? i already told my father i did