Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 64

Thread: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

  1. #31
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksfan2 View Post
    There is a first time for everything. Why does there need to be a documented history of seizures before a person can have one that could potentially endanger themselves?

    Why couldn't someone fall asleep in the tub and drown? Why couldn't she have some kind of rare blood disorder that the autopsy didn't reveal? Just because she was a healthy 24 year old doesn't mean that could have some kind of defect that could cause the drowning?
    OK, so you're saying the fact that "there's a first time for everything" rises to the level of reasonable doubt in your mind. Wonderful. I'd love to have you on my jury if I'm a defense attorney.

    As for your second point, there's been testimony in one of these trials that people don't drown when they fall asleep. They'd start choking and wake up

    http://www.wlwt.com/r/19011854/detail.html

    On your third point, you're really grasping at anything.

    Your reponses all add up to one thing: It'd be off the chart rare for her to just die. So rare you can't even come up with a scenario.

    I think the reason a lot of the public would vote for non guilty and 34 out of 36 jurors have voted guilty has to do with the judge's instructions on reasonable doubt. Most observers not on the jury didn't hear or take to heart those instructions. Some of you here want him guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    Do a little Googling on reasonable doubt. This study put it at about 70%:
    http://www.valpo.edu/mcs/pdf/ReasonableDoubtFinal.pdf

    In other words if you're 70% sure he's guilty then you believe he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Of all the possible scenarios, do you really think there's about a 30% chance that she just mysteriously drowned without him laying a hand on her?

    My guess is the chances of a healthy 24 yr old drowning at home, not due to a heart or stroke issue is about one in a million

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor View Post
    I guess my real bottom line is this -- I think he did it, I don't think they had nearly enough quality evidence to say he did it, and (most of all) I think I'm glad that I wasn't the one that had to prosecute this.
    They have evidence of bruising inside the skin on her neck. If he drowned her what more evidence would there be?

  4. #33
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,123

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea Ray View Post
    OK, so you're saying the fact that "there's a first time for everything" rises to the level of reasonable doubt in your mind. Wonderful. I'd love to have you on my jury if I'm a defense attorney.

    As for your second point, there's been testimony in one of these trials that people don't drown when they fall asleep. They'd start choking and wake up

    http://www.wlwt.com/r/19011854/detail.html

    On your third point, you're really grasping at anything.

    Your reponses all add up to one thing: It'd be off the chart rare for her to just die. So rare you can't even come up with a scenario.

    I think the reason a lot of the public would vote for non guilty and 34 out of 36 jurors have voted guilty has to do with the judge's instructions on reasonable doubt. Most observers not on the jury didn't hear or take to heart those instructions. Some of you here want him guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    Do a little Googling on reasonable doubt. This study put it at about 70%:
    http://www.valpo.edu/mcs/pdf/ReasonableDoubtFinal.pdf

    In other words if you're 70% sure he's guilty then you believe he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Of all the possible scenarios, do you really think there's about a 30% chance that she just mysteriously drowned without him laying a hand on her?

    My guess is the chances of a healthy 24 yr old drowning at home, not due to a heart or stroke issue is about one in a million
    It appears as if you have made up your mind in this case.

    All I am saying, and many others have said, is there is doubt. And from the information I have read I could not beyond a reasonable doubt convict Widmer. Thats it. Just because you think that a healthy 24 year old can't die of an unknown cause doesn't mean it can't happen. Just because your a healthy 24 year old doesn't mean you can't have a seizure.

    But I guess we just have a difference of opinions and will have to leave it at that.

  5. #34
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksfan2 View Post

    But I guess we just have a difference of opinions and will have to leave it at that.
    My point is merely that we disagree on the what constitutes reasonable doubt. That's all.

  6. #35
    Legends Never Die
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    West Chester and Toledo, OH
    Posts
    204

    Re: 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by redsfandan View Post
    No matter what you think of him I don't think it should reflect anything on the family.
    Widmer's mother is just as much of a story twister and liar that he is. Which is why she is already pushing juror miss trial. I just think especially with his mother his family is a lot of the problem too.
    "Baseball is a simple game. If you have good players and if you keep them in the right frame of mind then the manager is a success."- Sparky Anderson

    If anyone could make me a real signature that would be awesome I am not great with photoshop.

  7. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    1,735

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by Todd Gack View Post
    I'm just wondering why he let the tub drain instead of dragging her out of it.

    That, right there, doesn't make much sense to me.
    That's my biggest issue also. When you see someone possibly drowning, isn't the obvious first thing you do is get them out of the water? Who performs CPR while the victim is still in the water? I agree there was very little evidence to convict with, but there are a couple issues that certainly send up a red flag. I don't think he sounded very convincing during the 911 call. But not immediately pulling her body from the tub is the most telling sign, IMO.
    "I talked to an advance scout that told me if Joey Votto and Albert Pujols were on the same team he'd advise his team to do the unthinkable...pitch around Votto to get to Pujols." - Buster Olney, ESPN

  8. #37
    Member top6's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    cincinnati
    Posts
    1,653

    Re: 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by Cuban_Missile View Post
    Widmer's mother is just as much of a story twister and liar that he is. Which is why she is already pushing juror miss trial. I just think especially with his mother his family is a lot of the problem too.
    Liar or not, they turned out to be correct about the jury misconduct last time. But so far I have seen no evidence that it happened again.

    Anyway, I think Widmer has a chance on appeal on a few issues, imo. First, the "mystery witness" issue--it's hard for me to see how this law can be upheld generally or at the very least applied here. (Problem for Widmer here is that his attorneys did learn her identity before trial, so proving prejudice may be tough.)

    Second, I think the Defense should have been able to cross the investigator about his alleged misstatements in his personnel file. (Problem for Widmer here is that Judge's have wide discretion to exclude that type of cross examination. But, man, in a case that turns almost entirely on what was found at the scene in the immediate aftermath, I don't see how can preclude the defense from attacking the credibility of one of the only people who were there.)

    Third, I have heard at least one commentator I respect say that he thinks Widmer has a chance to appeal the court's ruling that he would receive less money for expert witnesses this time around. I honestly don't get this one, because it seems to me he got the same expert testimony he had last time, but maybe I am missing something.

    It will be interesting to me as a lawyer. Sad how many lives are being destroyed by this whole thing, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by New York Red View Post
    That's my biggest issue also. When you see someone possibly drowning, isn't the obvious first thing you do is get them out of the water? Who performs CPR while the victim is still in the water? I agree there was very little evidence to convict with, but there are a couple issues that certainly send up a red flag. I don't think he sounded very convincing during the 911 call. But not immediately pulling her body from the tub is the most telling sign, IMO.
    I agree there are issues with the 911 call. But I would also say that I have been told not to move somebody who is unconscious. Now, with the time to make a rational decision, I understand that this applies to someone who has potentially suffered a head injury, and in any event doesn't apply at all to someone who is in water. But in a panic could I revert to thinking "don't move this person"? I think so. I just have a hard time convicting him based on the 911 call alone, which based on some comments is seems some jurors did.

    I also don't understand how there wasn't more evidence of a struggle (bruises on her fingers, broken things) if he drowned her. I know there are bruises on the neck, but I don't see any reason to discredit Defense's expert's testimony that those were consistent with CPR.
    Last edited by top6; 02-17-2011 at 07:38 PM.

  9. #38
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by top6 View Post
    I also don't understand how there wasn't more evidence of a struggle (bruises on her fingers, broken things) if he drowned her. I know there are bruises on the neck, but I don't see any reason to discredit Defense's expert's testimony that those were consistent with CPR.
    I don't think you can "bruise" a dead person. If the blood isn't pumping I don't think you'll get bruising. In fact another coroner who testified said as much:

    Lee testified that injuries on Sarah Widmer would have happened before death because, “Bruises don’t occur after death.” He did say that bleeding can happen after death, as noticed on Sarah Widmer’s arms and neck where medics inserted needles for medication, but he said the surrounding soft tissue could not be injured post-mortem.

  10. #39
    KungFu Fighter AtomicDumpling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hamilton, OH
    Posts
    2,701

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    I followed the case pretty closely and I felt the whole episode was embarrassing for the community. The police were incompetent and dishonest. The prosecutors were inept (although it was a very difficult case to prove). Worst of all are the moronic jurors. Listening to post-trial interviews of the jurors was shocking -- they had some absolutely moronic lines of reasoning for why they came to their conclusion, especially their reasons for convicting him of murder instead of manslaughter. Shameful.

    I feel that Widmer probably did kill his wife, but there is almost no evidence to prove it. I think there is an awful lot of reasonable doubt.

    During the first trial most legal experts who witnessed the trial were convinced the jury would acquit due to an almost total lack of evidence. Of course that jury went on to convict him anyway, only to have the verdict overturned by numerous incidents of juror misconduct -- the most famous of which were the bathtub drying experiments.

    I heard a jury expert a couple weeks ago talk about how juries in Warren County almost always convict the defendant regardless of the evidence. Jurors there and all around the Cincinnati area are known for just unquestioningly accepting what the police and prosecutors assert and that is the end of it. They don't need proof. They just have 100% trust that the authorities always do the right thing.

    I can corroborate this to some degree from personal experience. When I lived in Warren County I served on a major felony trial jury of an old man accused of distributing cocaine. The other members of the jury were mostly middle-aged or older women. They were convinced the man was guilty before the trial even started. During breaks they talked about how rotten and evil the man was. They knew from the start they were going to convict the man, they didn't need to listen to the evidence -- especially the defense attorneys. The case was a sting operation carried out on audiotape by the Sheriff's Department and an undercover agent posing as a drug dealer who supplied the defendant with the drugs to sell. There was no question that the man had sold drugs to a couple of crackheads. The defense argued that the sting amounted to a set-up, that if the police had not staged this elaborate operation then the man would never have committed a crime -- the police supplied him with the drugs and presented him a buyer to whom he sold the drugs. The legal term for this is the Entrapment Defense. The judge then gave a long talk to the jury describing the legal definition of Entrapment and what is required to meet that status and how that should affect our verdict. Most of the jurors couldn't have cared less what the judge was saying, they didn't know what entrapment was and they didn't want to know. When the jury began our deliberations most of the jurors wanted to convict him without any discussion whatsoever. Only a couple of us actually wanted to give this man a fair trial and deliberate as a jury should. We needed to fill out some paperwork describing what requirements of the Entrapment defense were met and which were not, but those women refused to participate in the process. In the end we all agreed he was guilty, but the "Trial by Jury" was a farce from the start. I am sure a similar short-circuiting of our legal system happens a lot and most likely was a factor in the Widmer case as well.

  11. #40
    Legends Never Die
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    West Chester and Toledo, OH
    Posts
    204

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    I feel that Widmer probably did kill his wife, but there is almost no evidence to prove it. I think there is an awful lot of reasonable doubt.

    There is a lot of evidence.

    1. Her hair and head being the only thing wet. No one taking a bath is that skilled.

    2. The bruising around her neck is consistent with strangling.

    3. The delayed call to 911 is evidence as well anyone concerned would have called a lot earlier.

    4. The fact that he has been lying to the authorities since the very beginning on the 911 phone call.

    5. The authorities had been called out their numerous times for arguments between them and even one case of physical abuse because Ryan had beat on Sarah. That right there already falls into the category of a "Pattern of Violence." Proving he could have easily killed her based on his past actions.

    So believe what you want but there are 5 pieces of evidence right there.
    "Baseball is a simple game. If you have good players and if you keep them in the right frame of mind then the manager is a success."- Sparky Anderson

    If anyone could make me a real signature that would be awesome I am not great with photoshop.

  12. #41
    I hate the Cubs LoganBuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,121

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by Cuban_Missile View Post
    I feel that Widmer probably did kill his wife, but there is almost no evidence to prove it. I think there is an awful lot of reasonable doubt.

    There is a lot of evidence.

    1. Her hair and head being the only thing wet. No one taking a bath is that skilled.

    2. The bruising around her neck is consistent with strangling.

    3. The delayed call to 911 is evidence as well anyone concerned would have called a lot earlier.

    4. The fact that he has been lying to the authorities since the very beginning on the 911 phone call.

    5. The authorities had been called out their numerous times for arguments between them and even one case of physical abuse because Ryan had beat on Sarah. That right there already falls into the category of a "Pattern of Violence." Proving he could have easily killed her based on his past actions.

    So believe what you want but there are 5 pieces of evidence right there.
    1. No answer there
    2. Yet she has no defensive injuries
    3. What delay?
    4. "The fact", I think the 911 call is pretty incriminating, but I can leave room to think he was in some sort of emotional state, that caused him to be goofy.
    5. That is the first time I heard of that.
    The Sox traded Bullfrog the only player they've got for Shottenhoffen. Four-eyes Shottenhoffen a utility infielder. They've got a whole team of utility infielders.

  13. #42
    Legends Never Die
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    West Chester and Toledo, OH
    Posts
    204

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by LoganBuck View Post
    1. No answer there
    2. Yet she has no defensive injuries
    3. What delay?
    4. "The fact", I think the 911 call is pretty incriminating, but I can leave room to think he was in some sort of emotional state, that caused him to be goofy.
    5. That is the first time I heard of that.
    1. There is if you look at the facts.
    2. If he came up behind her with her size and his strength she could have been out before a struggle occurred.
    3. The 45 minute delay where he either had just found her or had been doing CPR this is where his story changes about 10 times. Which is where 4 comes into play as well.
    5. It is part of the case look it up.
    "Baseball is a simple game. If you have good players and if you keep them in the right frame of mind then the manager is a success."- Sparky Anderson

    If anyone could make me a real signature that would be awesome I am not great with photoshop.

  14. #43
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,123

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    Quote Originally Posted by Cuban_Missile View Post
    I feel that Widmer probably did kill his wife, but there is almost no evidence to prove it. I think there is an awful lot of reasonable doubt.

    There is a lot of evidence.

    1. Her hair and head being the only thing wet. No one taking a bath is that skilled.

    2. The bruising around her neck is consistent with strangling.

    3. The delayed call to 911 is evidence as well anyone concerned would have called a lot earlier.

    4. The fact that he has been lying to the authorities since the very beginning on the 911 phone call.

    5. The authorities had been called out their numerous times for arguments between them and even one case of physical abuse because Ryan had beat on Sarah. That right there already falls into the category of a "Pattern of Violence." Proving he could have easily killed her based on his past actions.

    So believe what you want but there are 5 pieces of evidence right there.
    Normally the prosecution has to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that someone is guilty. So I don't know exactly what your reasonable doubt is supposed to mean.

    4. I don't know how anyone is expected to be cool, calm and collective during a 911 call, especially when it deals with your wife being drowned. If your cool, calm, and collective to me that would be a sign of guilt. When I listened to the 911 call I heard a man who was flustered and confused. I myself found nothing unusual about that call, just someone who seem thoroughly confused.

    5. I have never once heard that he beat her or there had been numerous times the police had been called to their house. The only thing I heard along those lines is that Sarah Widmer was upset with Ryan for looking at internet porn and was mad at that. That is the only thing that was mentioned in the public about any dispute between the two people.

  15. #44
    Legends Never Die
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    West Chester and Toledo, OH
    Posts
    204
    5. In public is what you have to remember about what you just said.

    matt
    "Baseball is a simple game. If you have good players and if you keep them in the right frame of mind then the manager is a success."- Sparky Anderson

    If anyone could make me a real signature that would be awesome I am not great with photoshop.

  16. #45
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Ryan Widmer - 3rd time is a charm....

    To those who would have voted not guilty, what piece of evidence do you need? A video tape? If he's behind her stuffing her head into bath or toilet water it's very likely she couldn't get her hands backwards to defend herself and consequently have defensive injuries.

    Again there's nothing "reasonable" about a healthy 24 yr old dropping dead. There's no reasonable doubt that she must have died another way


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25