Judge rejects Robert Blake's request ...

Judge rejects Robert Blake's request for new civil trial

There are 9 comments on the Arizona Republic story from Apr 10, 2006, titled Judge rejects Robert Blake's request for new civil trial. In it, Arizona Republic reports that:

A judge on Monday denied actor Robert Blake's motion for a new trial in the civil wrongful death case stemming from the slaying of his wife, a court official said.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Arizona Republic.

James

Kirkland, WA

#1 Apr 11, 2006
O.J. and Blake have similar issues, both killed their lovers and both got away with murder. How much does it cost to kill and buy your way out? I liked the Baretta character but I do not like the personality of Robert Blake. I think he is as guilty as O.J.
Kerrie

Hollywood, FL

#2 Apr 11, 2006
James wrote:
O.J. and Blake have similar issues, both killed their lovers and both got away with murder. How much does it cost to kill and buy your way out? I liked the Baretta character but I do not like the personality of Robert Blake. I think he is as guilty as O.J.
Didn't you know that people in Hollywierd are exempt from the law. Just become famous and you can do it all, and your ratings will go up.
N Morrison

Canada

#3 Apr 21, 2006
James wrote:
O.J. and Blake have similar issues, both killed their lovers and both got away with murder. How much does it cost to kill and buy your way out? I liked the Baretta character but I do not like the personality of Robert Blake. I think he is as guilty as O.J.
Blake could have done it but so could anyone else. Nothing connects him to the crime.

“Sleep? Who needs it anyway?”

Since: Apr 06

Location hidden

#4 Apr 21, 2006
N Morrison wrote:
<quoted text>Blake could have done it but so could anyone else. Nothing connects him to the crime.
Hi Morrison. I haven't seen you since I said goodbye on your Petersen Forum. How's things going for you over there?

So you haven't made up your mind on Blake one way or the other? I'm sure you won't be surprised to know I think he's responsible for her death. What do you think about the Judges denial on the motion for a new civil trial?
N Morrison

Canada

#5 Apr 21, 2006
Debbysnack wrote:
<quoted text>

Hi Morrison. I haven't seen you since I said goodbye on your Petersen Forum. How's things going for you over there?

So you haven't made up your mind on Blake one way or the other? I'm sure you won't be surprised to know I think he's responsible for her death. What do you think about the Judges denial on the motion for a new civil trial?
That's par for the course. Appeals are about procedure, not truth. They'll never see a penny - OJ has paid almost nothing against his judgement, but leads a nice lifestyle.

As for Blake, if he did kill her it would be a weird way to go about it. Plus, there should have been SOME evidence and there was none. Where did the gun come from? That's the only real clue. I think, on balance, he didn't do it. It's one thing to want to do something, it's quite another to actually get up the courage to do it. Ever tried to kill a pet? Any animal? And that's easier than a human, AND the mother of your child.

“Sleep? Who needs it anyway?”

Since: Apr 06

Location hidden

#6 Apr 21, 2006
N Morrison wrote:
<quoted text>That's par for the course. Appeals are about procedure, not truth. They'll never see a penny - OJ has paid almost nothing against his judgement, but leads a nice lifestyle.

As for Blake, if he did kill her it would be a weird way to go about it. Plus, there should have been SOME evidence and there was none. Where did the gun come from? That's the only real clue. I think, on balance, he didn't do it. It's one thing to want to do something, it's quite another to actually get up the courage to do it. Ever tried to kill a pet? Any animal? And that's easier than a human, AND the mother of your child.
There wasn't any evidence, I agree. And of course that would be a weird way to off your wife, but in general, Blake is pretty weird. He has some serious possessive issues and I think he really did hate Bonnie. Anyway, no use hashing out why and why nots. Justice held up because there wasn't enough circumstantial evidence and that is good for all Americans on the large scale. Mainly wanted to say hello. I respect all the effort you put into the Petersen case even if we disagree. I have marked my calendar to return to your forum to see how your theory develops.
N Morrison

Canada

#7 Apr 21, 2006
Debbysnack wrote:
<quoted text>

There wasn't any evidence, I agree. And of course that would be a weird way to off your wife, but in general, Blake is pretty weird. He has some serious possessive issues and I think he really did hate Bonnie. Anyway, no use hashing out why and why nots. Justice held up because there wasn't enough circumstantial evidence and that is good for all Americans on the large scale. Mainly wanted to say hello. I respect all the effort you put into the Petersen case even if we disagree. I have marked my calendar to return to your forum to see how your theory develops.
Actually, as a result of the acrimony over there I had a really great breakthrough. I finally realised that although the "Where the bodies were found" argument is the first and last position of the guilties, and some jurors, it actually is irrelevant because it adds nothing to what is known. So I am well pleased about that.

“Sleep? Who needs it anyway?”

Since: Apr 06

Location hidden

#8 Apr 21, 2006
N Morrison wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, as a result of the acrimony over there I had a really great breakthrough. I finally realised that although the "Where the bodies were found" argument is the first and last position of the guilties, and some jurors, it actually is irrelevant because it adds nothing to what is known. So I am well pleased about that.
LOL. Well, honestly speaking, where the bodies were found is definitely not why I feel as I do. It is the totality of the circumstantial evidence. Everything.

But, I am sticking with guilty unless anything else develops, and in no way am I on the fence. Before I can fairly comment further, I would really have to read all your posts and not just the one thread. I may. I've been taking a holiday so to speak, from crime studies. Kinda burnt out after a solid two years of obsessing on it.:)
N Morrison

Canada

#9 Apr 21, 2006
Debbysnack wrote:
LOL. Well, honestly speaking, where the bodies were found is definitely not why I feel as I do. It is the totality of the circumstantial evidence. Everything....
In my case it was the stunning lack of any evidence, direct or circumstantial, which destroyed any belief I had in his guilt.$5 million and 5 months of prosecution and they had nothing. All they did was prove his innocence -- over and over again. Go figure.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Robert Blake Trial Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Audio of Durst in bathroom could play 2 ways in... (Mar '15) Apr '15 Octokus 2
News Abc's the View to Celebrate Barbara Walter's Il... (Mar '14) Nov '14 tomhalorwell 8
News Prabhakaran will get fair trial in India: US envoy (Feb '08) Apr '14 wasantha 24
News Piers Morgan Asks Robert Blake: "Are You Sane?" (Jul '12) Mar '14 ohwellwhatevernev... 3
News Simpson bail hearing set (Apr '08) Mar '14 Private 4
News Accused stabber in court (Nov '07) Feb '14 Private 7
News Robert Blake Bankrupt (Mar '06) Jan '14 ske 38
More from around the web