Comments
1 - 20 of 44 Comments Last updated Nov 14, 2012
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
What

Crofton, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Nov 6, 2012
 
What's the latest
End it

Hopkinsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Nov 10, 2012
 
Any news

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Nov 10, 2012
 
Leave it alone already!! If he did it or not the DA has blown it.He was found "Not Guilty" but the witch hunt goes on.
Really

Hopkinsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Nov 10, 2012
 
taurus pt809 wrote:
Leave it alone already!! If he did it or not the DA has blown it.He was found "Not Guilty" but the witch hunt goes on.
he will plea next week on the letters is the word out of murray. Something he has admitted for several years now.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Nov 10, 2012
 
Really wrote:
<quoted text>he will plea next week on the letters is the word out of murray. Something he has admitted for several years now.
He's never admitted anything,that's why he didn't testify before so he couldn't be asked about them..Wait and see,it's over.
Really

Hopkinsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Nov 10, 2012
 

Judged:

1

taurus pt809 wrote:
<quoted text>He's never admitted anything,that's why he didn't testify before so he couldn't be asked about them..Wait and see,it's over.
i agree he didn't testify but the letter were admitted to before both trials. Why do you think it's over? You may be right but I know the case and he has admitted to them before the first trial in 2001
Independent

Owensboro, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Nov 11, 2012
 
taurus pt809 wrote:
<quoted text>He's never admitted anything,that's why he didn't testify before so he couldn't be asked about them..Wait and see,it's over.
He admitted it to the police long ago. He will take a plea, just as he should.
Yes

Williamston, SC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Nov 11, 2012
 
Independent wrote:
<quoted text>
He admitted it to the police long ago. He will take a plea, just as he should.
i agree though not sure if I agree not understand. He admitted to it 13-14 years ago, nothing with the letters have changed as they were used in 2001 as they were in this trial, but now he is charged. Why now? We all know the answer but before the arson is brought up, it was brought up in 2001 as well. A jury has acquitted him of setting the fire. I just am confused with this. I do not think it is right.
Independent

Owensboro, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Nov 11, 2012
 
Yes wrote:
<quoted text>i agree though not sure if I agree not understand. He admitted to it 13-14 years ago, nothing with the letters have changed as they were used in 2001 as they were in this trial, but now he is charged. Why now? We all know the answer but before the arson is brought up, it was brought up in 2001 as well. A jury has acquitted him of setting the fire. I just am confused with this. I do not think it is right.
The defense objected to the tampering charges being part of this trial. The prosecutor wanted to include them, but relented. So now the tampering charge is being dealt with. If the defense had not objected, the whole thing would have been over with months ago. I am continually amazed that anyone wants tampering with a murder investigation to be excused.
Yes

Williamston, SC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Nov 11, 2012
 
Independent wrote:
<quoted text>
The defense objected to the tampering charges being part of this trial. The prosecutor wanted to include them, but relented. So now the tampering charge is being dealt with. If the defense had not objected, the whole thing would have been over with months ago. I am continually amazed that anyone wants tampering with a murder investigation to be excused.
not saying that just can't agree with them waiting 14 years to deal with it when the defendant has admitted to it for so long. Also the defense did not object to them being a part of it. Also the charge is tampering with physical evidence not tampering with a mirder investigations. All based on letters. If they were going to charge him with writing the letters why not 14 years ago if it was serious.
Agree

Williamston, SC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Nov 11, 2012
 
Yes wrote:
<quoted text>not saying that just can't agree with them waiting 14 years to deal with it when the defendant has admitted to it for so long. Also the defense did not object to them being a part of it. Also the charge is tampering with physical evidence not tampering with a mirder investigations. All based on letters. If they were going to charge him with writing the letters why not 14 years ago if it was serious.
I agree. The charge isn't what is upsetting it is the timing. I do remember after the first charges were brought against walker in 1999 he confessed to the letters and has ever since. Those letters didn't hurt anyone however they may have caused some issues with the investigation. My question is and remains why would anyone wait till now to bring charges. Also these tampering charges were taken to a grand jury on July 2 when walkers trial began on July 9. Too soon to include. Why didn't Blankenship include these charges with all the others in September 2011.
Bill

Ashburn, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Nov 11, 2012
 
taurus pt809 wrote:
Leave it alone already!! If he did it or not the DA has blown it.He was found "Not Guilty" but the witch hunt goes on.
there aren't DA's in KY. Stick to talking about stuff you actually know about
Independent

Owensboro, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Nov 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Yes wrote:
<quoted text>not saying that just can't agree with them waiting 14 years to deal with it when the defendant has admitted to it for so long. Also the defense did not object to them being a part of it. Also the charge is tampering with physical evidence not tampering with a mirder investigations. All based on letters. If they were going to charge him with writing the letters why not 14 years ago if it was serious.
OK.....tampering with physical evidence in a murder investigation. That that formality is out of the way. You are in error in saying that the defense did not object. That is exactly why they are being executed now instead of months ago when the trial was in progress. Both sides agreed to that after Dennis Null refused to go along. Now Null wants to act like they are just additional charges to persecute his client. No surprise there. That's what lawyers do, attempt to rouse public sympathy for their client.
Yes

Williamston, SC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Nov 11, 2012
 
Independent wrote:
<quoted text>
OK.....tampering with physical evidence in a murder investigation. That that formality is out of the way. You are in error in saying that the defense did not object. That is exactly why they are being executed now instead of months ago when the trial was in progress. Both sides agreed to that after Dennis Null refused to go along. Now Null wants to act like they are just additional charges to persecute his client. No surprise there. That's what lawyers do, attempt to rouse public sympathy for their client.
ok but why not bring them 13 years ago if they are as serious of charges as the prosecutor wants us to believe? Also why didn't Blankenship include them in the original indictment? Not arguing just trying to understand his motives?
Kim

Trenton, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Nov 11, 2012
 

Judged:

3

1

This is all about Blakenship being a sore loser. We all saw how corrupt he is by his involvement in the Zay Jackson case. He wanted to let him walk because he plays ball but Walker, who has been acquitted, he wants to continuously try and destroy this mans life. Blakenship should be fired and disbarred.
Independent

Owensboro, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Nov 11, 2012
 
Kim wrote:
This is all about Blakenship being a sore loser. We all saw how corrupt he is by his involvement in the Zay Jackson case. He wanted to let him walk because he plays ball but Walker, who has been acquitted, he wants to continuously try and destroy this mans life. Blakenship should be fired and disbarred.
You have included a ridiculous lie in your post. Nobody ever wanted Jackson to walk.
Independent

Owensboro, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Nov 11, 2012
 
Yes wrote:
<quoted text>ok but why not bring them 13 years ago if they are as serious of charges as the prosecutor wants us to believe? Also why didn't Blankenship include them in the original indictment? Not arguing just trying to understand his motives?
I read what Blankenship had to say about that recently. I do not recall the source (paper or WPSD site). He was quite clear in his explanation and it all was logical from his perspective. It wasn't his call at the time. I will attempt to find his quote.
Haha

Kuttawa, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Nov 11, 2012
 
Independent wrote:
<quoted text>
I read what Blankenship had to say about that recently. I do not recall the source (paper or WPSD site). He was quite clear in his explanation and it all was logical from his perspective. It wasn't his call at the time. I will attempt to find his quote.
believing that if it is in the paper or on the news it must be fact....hahaha
Independent

Owensboro, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Nov 11, 2012
 
Independent wrote:
<quoted text>
I read what Blankenship had to say about that recently. I do not recall the source (paper or WPSD site). He was quite clear in his explanation and it all was logical from his perspective. It wasn't his call at the time. I will attempt to find his quote.
http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/ky-state-news/...

I did find the above article at WPSD. It has nothing to do with the charges years ago, but indicates that Blankenship wanted to combine the charges and the defense refused. I will look some more for the Blankenship quotes about what happened originally.
Interesting

Kuttawa, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Nov 11, 2012
 
Independent wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/ky-state-news/...
I did find the above article at WPSD. It has nothing to do with the charges years ago, but indicates that Blankenship wanted to combine the charges and the defense refused. I will look some more for the Blankenship quotes about what happened originally.
i have not a dog in this race. I did attend two days of trial in July and will say that what wpsd reported on, wasn't exactly what happened. You can't read a lot in what is in the media. I hope all understand that. Maybe walker should have a consequence but it should be very mild considering the timing and fact that he as admitted to it for years.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

14 Users are viewing the Murray Forum right now

Search the Murray Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Murray Voco 1 hr bob 13
KY 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 2 hr Curmudgeon 147,246
KY Hundreds of birds die in western Ky. (Jan '11) 3 hr Gfm 81,565
The Truth about Israel 4 hr Henry McKenna 219
cook out grill 4 hr Toofunny 23
i have a drinking problem 4 hr Alrighty Then 13
Executive orders out of control? 5 hr For Sure 3
calloway county court clerk 8 hr Voter 29
landlords to avoid? (Mar '13) 8 hr current tenant 44
Dr. Derek Morgan (Jun '12) Wed unknown 36
•••
•••
•••
•••

Murray Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Murray People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Murray News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Murray
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••