I just saw online where this POS was acquitted. I don't know about y'all, but I'm not going to confess to a murder within 90 seconds of being interrogated (and write out a confession) and provide explicit details about what happened if I didn't do it. Granted I did not hear the testimony, but I am truly shocked at this. Good Lord.
ND: Unbelievable- Ryan Duke not guilty of murdering Tara Grinstead
- Thread starter andrepulpwood
- Start date
You don't know what evidence came out the trial and yet you are shocked with the outcome?
Hey Donalsonville - What's the SOL on the charge he was convicted of? That conviction may get tossed.
Believe for most felonies its four years, so that's possible. The max sentence is 10 years, and he's already served 5 pre-trial, so it's possible he walks out Monday.
Yeah, I followed this whole saga more closely than I should. The slip by the Chief of Police in trial that they were made aware of the body being moved out to an orchard in another county and burned shortly after the murder may mean the clock started ticking back in 2005. At the end of the day, we may have "justice" in this one but it is a sad day for many.
My point was I find it pretty shocking for someone who immediately confessed and even wrote out a confession with details about what happened to have been acquitted. Typically people don't confess to murder and provide explicit details about what happened right when confronted about it when they didn't do it. Or at least I wouldn't think that would be typical.
Well that is if you call "immediate" 12 years after the murder. Look, as with most things in life, this case was anything but black and white. It is disgusting that a lady got murdered and that we will never know what happened. I'm not so sure that jury got it wrong, though, in terms of applying the law to the "facts" as they exist now some 17 years later.
That's a fair point, and lots of people say "I would never confess to a crime I didn't do!" The thing is this: It happens way more often than people think, and it is done by people who you would not at all consider unintelligent. People think confession, even in the legal context, brings closure for a multitude of reasons that are not entirely logical.
I meant he apparently confessed immediately upon being questioned by police, if the article is correct, which if course it may not be.
If you live here it doesnt shock you, lol. Idt he was guilty of murder but I am telling you the truth of this whole thing will never come out. There are tons of salty details they didnt even mention during the case. Beau Dukes pleading 5th made him look guilty...guy wouldnt even confirm his name. And there are 2 other suspects in this case that are dead, Sadly the family will never truly know what happened to her.
"You don't need a lawyer to talk to the cops" and "nobody is going to confess to something he didn't do" are two of the most naïve ideas I can imagine....
That's the part of the story that needs context. He confessed when he was interviewed in 2017 or whenever it was. That was 12 years after the incident happened and there was a lot of other weird stuff in play by then. It was "immediately" upon being questioned but it wasn't at the time of the crime.
Just a really screwed up situation. And sad.
Yep. A close friend of mine has a relative that was interviewed for a murder. he said over the course of 7 hours in between being grilled with a good cop, bad cop routine. he started believing that maybe he could have murdered the guy and just not remembered it.
People get worn down and they truly believe in the “just tell me what I want to hear and we can make this stop” bit.
Not saying that happened here or that all confessions are fake, but it’s way higher than people with no experience may think.
Right but I wasn’t answering about murder, I was talking about the concealing. Hence the use of “most”
No one down here was shocked at the verdict. He will be sentenced Monday but probably be given time already served. Bo was the murderer.
