The trial of Molly Martens

fussyonion

I'm just dumbfounded at the amount of people on here commenting on the accused's physical appearance; "I would" and "She's hot".

Trivialising such a horrible case where two kids lost their father..it just baffles me.

I doubt anyone would say the same about Joe O'Reilly ("Jaysus I know he killed his wife but I would").

Why is it somehow funny or ok to make comments like this towards a woman?

Ulysses Gaze

fussyonion wrote: »

I'm just dumbfounded at the amount of people on here commenting on the accused's physical appearance; "I would" and "She's hot".

Trivialising such a horrible case where two kids lost their father..it just baffles me.

I doubt anyone would say the same about Joe O'Reilly ("Jaysus I know he killed his wife but I would").

Why is it somehow funny or ok to make comments like this towards a woman?

Anyone who said that should be committed.

pickarooney

fussyonion wrote: »

I'm just dumbfounded at the amount of people on here commenting on the accused's physical appearance; "I would" and "She's hot".

Trivialising such a horrible case where two kids lost their father..it just baffles me.

I doubt anyone would say the same about Joe O'Reilly ("Jaysus I know he killed his wife but I would").

Why is it somehow funny or ok to make comments like this towards a woman?

Jeremy Meeks?

Muahahaha

kylith wrote: »

What casts doubt on their story, for me, is the sleeping tablet, the paving stone, and the fact that while her father claimed he had the baseball bat in his room as a gift for the son the son contradicted him by saying that he'd actually been given it the previous year, so her father would have had to go get it.

If you're going and getting weapons to beat in the head of someone with sleeping tablets in their system it does cast doubt on your 'self defense' claim. Although, I have no idea how much of the drug was in his system; which would obviously have a bearing on how out of it he was.

I think the sleeping tablet has been shown in evidence now to be a bit of a red herring, because 1) he only had very small traces in his bloodstream, not enough to knock him out and 2) because he himself had a prescription for sleeping pills and also their pharmacist testified that they knew the couple to regularly use each others sleeping pills. Im not saying that she didnt drug him, only that there is a reasonable doubt that she may not have which is where the bar of proof is that is needed to find them guilty.

The landscape rock and the baseball bat though are defintely going to be examined in great detail. Also paramedic testimony today said the body was very cold when they got there which might suggest he was dead more than an hour before they rang 911, it has begun to look like they needed time to get their story straight on what happened.

LETHAL LADY

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Anyone who said that should be committed.

I would. Look at them chins!

bear1

Would the kids now have been sent back to Ireland for care?

jluv

bear1 wrote: »

Would the kids now have been sent back to Ireland for care?

Yes, his family had to go to court and fight for them but they are now in their care (in Ireland I believe)

bear1

jluv wrote: »

Yes, his family had to go to court and fight for them but they are now in their care (in Ireland I believe)

Fight for them.. sure who the fook would there be?
The suspects ****ed up family? Hope they get all the care they need.

spud82

jluv wrote: »

Yes, his family had to go to court and fight for them but they are now in their care (in Ireland I believe)

Kids are well and back in Limerick. Also I can't believe some of the comments on here about how that some of ye would do Molly. Why feel the need to make light of such a heartbreaking case.

Being from Limerick I can tell you the family are in bits the amount of **** that family has been through is heart wrenching, and as for the two kids, no words will ever really summarize how brave and strong they are.

We are all sick with nerves here, and hoping that the right verdict is called and reached.

jluv

bear1 wrote: »

Fight for them.. sure who the fook would there be?
The suspects ****ed up family? Hope they get all the care they need.

Apologies,not wanting to offend anyone,only following on social media.
But it seemed to me that Jasons family had to actually go to court to get the children back to Ireland.

RacoonQueen

jluv wrote: »

Apologies,not wanting to offend anyone,only following on social media.
But it seemed to me that Jasons family had to actually go to court to get the children back to Ireland.

They did. If I remember, he had left the care of his kids to his sister in his will and Molly fought it, stuff I read at the time suggested her lawyer told her to as it would look good for her to be showing she loved the children and wanted to be their mother etc

Gatling

RacoonQueen wrote: »

They did. If I remember, he had left the care of his kids to his sister in his will and Molly fought it, stuff I read at the time suggested her lawyer told her to as it would look good for her to be showing she loved the children and wanted to be their mother etc

Yes ,he married her but never made her a guardian to the kids ,she was step mom in title only ,
Thank God

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

Yes ,he married her but never made her a guardian to the kids ,she was step mom in title only ,
Thank God

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

smurgen

Gatling wrote: »

Yes ,he married her but never made her a guardian to the kids ,she was step mom in title only ,
Thank God

jesus she sounds like a right piece of work.

fima

Deleted User wrote: »

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

Wtf! A controlling bully because he wanted his children to live with his family. That's an insane statement to make. I'm a stepmother, I'm not a guardian to my step kids. My husbands not a controlling bully but if myself and my Da ever decide to murder him I wouldn't expect to then gain custody of my step kids ... Does the fact that she felt entitled to custody of the children and insisted that she was their 'Mom' not serve to show that she is a mentally ill twisted individual?

jbt123

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

Absolutely absurd comment

RacoonQueen

Deleted User wrote: »

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

To me it suggests he didn't want her having the kids should anything happen to him. Which speaks volumes, especially given what happened in the end.
Given their mother had passed away, their stepmother adopting them would seem logical - yet he didn't want her to...suggests he thought she was crazy...

edit because I've only noticed your second part of the comment. The people whose care they were left in are the dead mans family, of COURSE they are going to go to the trial in the hope they see his murderers brought to justice. They may also be required to give evidence of the relationship between the two.

retro:electro

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

How on earth did you come to this illogical conclusion??

padser

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

It always amazes me how quickly pretty much any topic can get into man bashing with insinuations that the man was abusing the woman.

In this case, we have a man beaten to death in his bed by his wife / father in law.

But yes, the fact he didn't make his wife step mom to his kids obviously shows him to be a controlling bully.

I also noticed that reports indicate he was naked <mod snip>removed wild speculation</mod snip>

monkeybutter

fussyonion wrote: »

I'm just dumbfounded at the amount of people on here commenting on the accused's physical appearance; "I would" and "She's hot".

Trivialising such a horrible case where two kids lost their father..it just baffles me.

I doubt anyone would say the same about Joe O'Reilly ("Jaysus I know he killed his wife but I would").

Why is it somehow funny or ok to make comments like this towards a woman?

Yes it's just another anti-woman agenda

There are women out there who have married cereal rapists and murderers in Prison

Even Hitler had a girlfriend

The pendulum swings both ways

Also are you saying you think Joe o'Reilly is hot, but the whole wife murder thing puts you off him

Hot is Hot

Cork Lass

Deleted User wrote: »

Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

I can't believe this comment. Are you suggesting they should have brought them? Perhaps they should have sat them in the courtroom during the trial so they could be subjected to the gorey details.

baldbear

Paramedics who arrived at the scene said that the victims blood was congealing and his body cold. Sounds like who ever beat him to death had to clean themselves up & get their story straight.

Carry

monkeybutter wrote: »

(...) cereal rapists and murderers (...)

I can never look at my breakfast cereal ever the same again ...

Sorry, off topic. I'm on my way.

CeilingFly

Interesting to see a substantial difference in teh reporting angle between the hysterical Independent who are making it this summer's major story and the local media in North Carolina.

Whilst the death was horriffic, the indo is leaving out quite a bit of information that a normal non hysterical media outlet would report in order to give a propoer balance to the coverage.

In north carolina its barely making news.

ohnonotgmail

CeilingFly wrote: »

Interesting to see a substantial difference in teh reporting angle between the hysterical Independent who are making it this summer's major story and the local media in North Carolina.

Whilst the death was horriffic, the indo is leaving out quite a bit of information that a normal non hysterical media outlet would report in order to give a propoer balance to the coverage.

In north carolina its barely making news.

any links to the north carolina coverage?

bear1

Deleted User wrote: »

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

Are you mad?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Deleted User wrote: »

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

Eh? Leave his kids with a woman who was nothing to her, and who caved their fathers head in with a baseball bat? That's taking victim blaming and nazi feminism to a whole new level. I hope they throw the book at her

Auldloon

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

any links to the north carolina coverage?

I'm following it here, not North Carolina. Any others would be welcome.
http://www.the-dispatch.com/news/20170727/witnesses-no-injuries-visible-to-molly-corbett

RacoonQueen

Auldloon wrote: »

I'm following it here, not North Carolina. Any others would be welcome.
http://www.the-dispatch.com/news/20170727/witnesses-no-injuries-visible-to-molly-corbett

Interesting "Bent said he didn’t notice any blonde hairs in Jason Corbett’s hand. During opening statements on Tuesday, defense lawyers Walter Holton and David Freedman alleged that Jason Corbett was clutching a strand of blond hair in his hand."

AGC

CeilingFly wrote: »

Interesting to see a substantial difference in teh reporting angle between the hysterical Independent who are making it this summer's major story and the local media in North Carolina.

Whilst the death was horriffic, the indo is leaving out quite a bit of information that a normal non hysterical media outlet would report in order to give a propoer balance to the coverage.

In north carolina its barely making news.

Bible belt - They would not like the this story having too much publicity for the area. The thoughts of the girl next door and FBI agent committing murder would not sit well.

There will also be the element of trying to 'protect their own' as with the indo who will try and ensure it is in the public eye Ireland to get justice.

Auldloon

The whole thing stinks. I hope justice is served but I wouldn't hold my breath.

jimmycrackcorm

CeilingFly wrote:

In north carolina its barely making news.

Just another murder in the U.S. it's also not an American who died either.

The Australian lady shot by police is also getting much more coverage in OZ than in the States.

iguana

The bit that makes no sense to me is that Martens was an FBI agent. An FBI agent isn't a run of the mill cop. Martens probably had a law degree or some sort of medical/biology degree before ever going to Quantico. He would have gone through specialised training and then had several decades of experience as an agent. As an agent he worked for counterintelligence which means he was pretty good at his job. If he wanted to stage a murder, surely he'd have managed to do a better job of it?

Added to that, the pair are charged with second degree murder, which means intentional but not premeditated. So either the prosecution don't believe that Martens and Martens-Corbett planned the murder or they don't believe they have enough evidence to prove they planned it. Either way it makes a lot of the speculation in the Irish media look very hyperbolic as it's at odds with the actual charge the pair are being tried for. That said the articles in the US media that I have read are no more sympathetic to Martens and Martens-Corbett than the Irish media, just calmer about it.

We are unlikely to ever know what really happened but it isn't unheard of for an abusive husband to be murdered by his victim or a family member. It's also really, really common for strangulation to leave no visible marks. Being naked while attacking a spouse isn't unheard of. Attacking a spouse while her family is in the house is stupid but not unheard of. Refusing to allow her to adopt the children could have been a way to exert control. And domestic abuse victims can often appear to be controlling to people with limited insight into a relationship. On the other hand, Corbett had taken a leap of faith by moving to the US with her and it would be completely understandable if he wanted to keep guardianship of the children to himself only because if he shared it with her, he would be trapped in her country in the event of their marriage ending. If I was widowed, I think I'd be absolutely loath to let a future husband share guardianship of my son, especially if we relocated to his home country. It's also not unheard of to murder someone and claim self-defence. Corbett could have been planning to return home with the children and his wife may have murdered him in anger/in the hope of keeping the children. Really either scenario could be the truth or the truth could be somewhere in the middle.

monkeybutter

objection!!

ohnonotgmail

iguana wrote: »

The bit that makes no sense to me is that Martens was an FBI agent. An FBI agent isn't a run of the mill cop. Martens probably had a law degree or some sort of medical/biology degree before ever going to Quantico. He would have gone through specialised training and then had several decades of experience as an agent. As an agent he worked for counterintelligence which means he was pretty good at his job. If he wanted to stage a murder, surely he'd have managed to do a better job of it?

Added to that, the pair are charged with second degree murder, which means intentional but not premeditated. So either the prosecution don't believe that Martens and Martens-Corbett planned the murder or they don't believe they have enough evidence to prove they planned it. Either way it makes a lot of the speculation in the Irish media look very hyperbolic as it's at odds with the actual charge the pair are being tried for. That said the articles in the US media that I have read are no more sympathetic to Martens and Martens-Corbett than the Irish media, just calmer about it.

We are unlikely to ever know what really happened but it isn't unheard of for an abusive husband to be murdered by his victim or a family member. It's also really, really common for strangulation to leave no visible marks. Being naked while attacking a spouse isn't unheard of. Attacking a spouse while her family is in the house is stupid but not unheard of. Refusing to allow her to adopt the children could have been a way to exert control. And domestic abuse victims can often appear to be controlling to people with limited insight into a relationship. On the other hand, Corbett had taken a leap of faith by moving to the US with her and it would be completely understandable if he wanted to keep guardianship of the children to himself only because if he shared it with her, he would be trapped in her country in the event of their marriage ending. If I was widowed, I think I'd be absolutely loath to let a future husband share guardianship of my son, especially if we relocated to his home country. It's also not unheard of to murder someone and claim self-defence. Corbett could have been planning to return home with the children and his wife may have murdered him in anger/in the hope of keeping the children. Really either scenario could be the truth or the truth could be somewhere in the middle.

He was planning to return to Ireland with the kids but without his wife and had already started to liquidate assets.

monkeybutter

iguana wrote: »

The bit that makes no sense to me is that Martens was an FBI agent. An FBI agent isn't a run of the mill cop. Martens probably had a law degree or some sort of medical/biology degree before ever going to Quantico. He would have gone through specialised training and then had several decades of experience as an agent. As an agent he worked for counterintelligence which means he was pretty good at his job. If he wanted to stage a murder, surely he'd have managed to do a better job of it?

Added to that, the pair are charged with second degree murder, which means intentional but not premeditated. So either the prosecution don't believe that Martens and Martens-Corbett planned the murder or they don't believe they have enough evidence to prove they planned it. Either way it makes a lot of the speculation in the Irish media look very hyperbolic as it's at odds with the actual charge the pair are being tried for. That said the articles in the US media that I have read are no more sympathetic to Martens and Martens-Corbett than the Irish media, just calmer about it.

We are unlikely to ever know what really happened but it isn't unheard of for an abusive husband to be murdered by his victim or a family member. It's also really, really common for strangulation to leave no visible marks. Being naked while attacking a spouse isn't unheard of. Attacking a spouse while her family is in the house is stupid but not unheard of. Refusing to allow her to adopt the children could have been a way to exert control. And domestic abuse victims can often appear to be controlling to people with limited insight into a relationship. On the other hand, Corbett had taken a leap of faith by moving to the US with her and it would be completely understandable if he wanted to keep guardianship of the children to himself only because if he shared it with her, he would be trapped in her country in the event of their marriage ending. If I was widowed, I think I'd be absolutely loath to let a future husband share guardianship of my son, especially if we relocated to his home country. It's also not unheard of to murder someone and claim self-defence. Corbett could have been planning to return home with the children and his wife may have murdered him in anger/in the hope of keeping the children. Really either scenario could be the truth or the truth could be somewhere in the middle.

anyway, while some things are not unheard of, like a previously sane man attempting to strangle his wife while naked and with his father in law there, although I've never heard of it myself, it's not very probable, which is how it will be looked upon

irishgeo

must have been some shock for the paramedics arriving for a heart attack and to find a man with his bashed in.

lazybones32

iguana wrote: »

The bit that makes no sense to me is that Martens was an FBI agent. An FBI agent isn't a run of the mill cop. Martens probably had a law degree or some sort of medical/biology degree before ever going to Quantico.

And he would have plenty of connections through the fbi, with law enforcement agencies, that if domestic abuse was happening, she could have reported it. But i haven't heard of any allegation beyond an inadmissable coached statement that there was ever abuse.

Cork Lass

Cork Lass wrote: »

I can't believe this comment. Are you suggesting they should have brought them? Perhaps they should have sat them in the courtroom during the trial so they could be subjected to the gorey details.

One of them could have stayed home with them. This trial could take weeks. This is the time they need stability and support, not being pawned off on other people.

The rest of my comment was an effort to show another possibility. We're only getting the prosecution side yet.

No matter what the outcome, there are 2 vulnerable children who need all the support they can get. They know better than anyone else the state of their fathers marriage. Personally, I would be at home with them, leaving other family members to attend the court.

jmayo

Deleted User wrote: »

Would that not serve to show him as a controlling bully? Also, the couple who fought for them have left them behind in Ireland while the case is on. So much for stability.

Should they have brought them to court to hear how their Daddy had his skull bashed in with the sons baseball bat.

RacoonQueen

Deleted User wrote: »

One of them could have stayed home with them. This trial could take weeks. This is the time they need stability and support, not being pawned off on other people.

Other people? Like their family?

I suspect if it was my brother that had had his head smashed in with a bat and landscaping stone and I was going to another country to attend the trial I would need my husband by my side. Imagine going through that on your own.
Ridiculous trying to align some sort of lack of care to his sister and her husband.

I'm sure the children are being well looked after, loved and cared for back home by other family members. Who'd be looking after sure if they'd been left with her? :rolleyes:

jmayo

iguana wrote: »

The bit that makes no sense to me is that Martens was an FBI agent. An FBI agent isn't a run of the mill cop. Martens probably had a law degree or some sort of medical/biology degree before ever going to Quantico. He would have gone through specialised training and then had several decades of experience as an agent. As an agent he worked for counterintelligence which means he was pretty good at his job. If he wanted to stage a murder, surely he'd have managed to do a better job of it?

Added to that, the pair are charged with second degree murder, which means intentional but not premeditated. So either the prosecution don't believe that Martens and Martens-Corbett planned the murder or they don't believe they have enough evidence to prove they planned it. Either way it makes a lot of the speculation in the Irish media look very hyperbolic as it's at odds with the actual charge the pair are being tried for. That said the articles in the US media that I have read are no more sympathetic to Martens and Martens-Corbett than the Irish media, just calmer about it.

We are unlikely to ever know what really happened but it isn't unheard of for an abusive husband to be murdered by his victim or a family member. It's also really, really common for strangulation to leave no visible marks. Being naked while attacking a spouse isn't unheard of. Attacking a spouse while her family is in the house is stupid but not unheard of. Refusing to allow her to adopt the children could have been a way to exert control. And domestic abuse victims can often appear to be controlling to people with limited insight into a relationship. On the other hand, Corbett had taken a leap of faith by moving to the US with her and it would be completely understandable if he wanted to keep guardianship of the children to himself only because if he shared it with her, he would be trapped in her country in the event of their marriage ending. If I was widowed, I think I'd be absolutely loath to let a future husband share guardianship of my son, especially if we relocated to his home country. It's also not unheard of to murder someone and claim self-defence. Corbett could have been planning to return home with the children and his wife may have murdered him in anger/in the hope of keeping the children. Really either scenario could be the truth or the truth could be somewhere in the middle.

Is it also not unheard of to contact the emergency services after one of these self defense killings and tell them that it is a heart attack they are going to attend ????

Is it also unheard of to claim that the weapon used was only bought a few days before when it was in the possession of the son for a year or so ?
Would that not would appear a crazy error to make ?

Oh and here is the big one for me.
EDIT:
was the intitial call to emergency services that there was a heart attack or was it that there was an assault ?
If it was a heart attack wouldn't it just mean that the only first responders were paramedics and not police also ?

Surely if it was self defense daddy would with all his Qauntico training not have called it in correctly ?

It took paramedics a while to realise that there were dealing with massive head trauma and not heartattack because the bedroom was so dimly lit.
And surely the father, with his undoubted training and knowledge, could have told them when they entered what had happened ?

Did all of this gave the father and daughter more time to play with until police arrived on scene.

I personally think the missus did it and daddy quickly fabricated a story to protect her.

Both of them deserve major jail time and in his case he will get quite the welcome.

Auldloon

Where did this heart attack story come from? In the 911 call there was nothing said about a heart attack the father says that he thinks he might have killed him or something like that.

ohnonotgmail

Auldloon wrote: »

Where did this heart attack story come from? In the 911 call there was nothing said about a heart attack the father says that he thinks he might have killed him or something like that.

when the 911 dispatcher was giving evidence she did mention that she instructed the pair to give him CPR. why would she do that for head trauma?

Gatling

Auldloon wrote: »

Where did this heart attack story come from? In the 911 call there was nothing said about a heart attack the father says that he thinks he might have killed him or something like that.

The paramedics who attended said that they were told it was a suspected heart attack they were attending not an assault

listermint

jmayo wrote: »

Is it also not unheard of to contact the emergency services after one of these self defense killings and tell them that it is a heart attack they are going to attend ????

Is it also unheard of to claim that the weapon used was only bought a few days before when it was in the possession of the son for a year or so ?
Would that not would appear a crazy error to make ?

Oh and here is the big one for me.
EDIT:
was the intitial call to emergency services that there was a heart attack or was it that there was an assault ?
If it was a heart attack wouldn't it just mean that the only first responders were paramedics and not police also ?

Surely if it was self defense daddy would with all his Qauntico training not have called it in correctly ?

It took paramedics a while to realise that there were dealing with massive head trauma and not heartattack because the bedroom was so dimly lit.
And surely the father, with his undoubted training and knowledge, could have told them when they entered what had happened ?

Did all of this gave the father and daughter more time to play with until police arrived on scene.

I personally think the missus did it and daddy quickly fabricated a story to protect her.

Both of them deserve major jail time and in his case he will get quite the welcome.

And Paving Slab,

You know the paving slabs you keep by the bed just to get that real patio feel in the bedroom.

Muahahaha

CeilingFly wrote: »

Interesting to see a substantial difference in teh reporting angle between the hysterical Independent who are making it this summer's major story and the local media in North Carolina.

Whilst the death was horriffic, the indo is leaving out quite a bit of information that a normal non hysterical media outlet would report in order to give a propoer balance to the coverage.

In north carolina its barely making news.

Agree with this, the Indos reporting on the trial is so completely biased that you have to go elsewhere to find middle ground.

Just the other day they had headlines screaming that Jason had sleeping pills in his system, pills that Molly had gotten from the pharmacy a few days previous which led the reader to infer that she drugged him. What the Indo left out of their report was that the pharmacist testified that Jason also had a sleeping pill prescription and he often used Mollys sleeping pills, also the post mortem reported only small traces in his blood, not enough to conk him out. But that didnt stop the Indo leading readers to believe that she drugged him, you can even see posters on this thread stating the same thing because of how the Indo reported it by deliberately leaving pertinent and important facts out of the story. Absolute gutter journalism by that paper.

Auldloon

Here's some of the 911 call.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/corbett-911-call-he-s-bleeding-all-over-and-i-may-have-killed-him-1.3169745

danganabu

It's very re-assuring to see that the premise of innocent until proven guilty is very much alive and well :rolleyes:

Kunkka

I really thought this would be a slam dunk case for prosecutors on foot of the original stuff I heard about this man's gruesome death. Now I am not so sure. Very easy to paint someone as a monster when they have no way of defending themselves. If the victim was the controlling abusive husband that they are expecting to portray him to be, why the hell would he want to move back to Ireland without the person he wanted to control... (if that is in fact true?). Does not fit the profile at all.