And she has been fantasizing about it for years (she wrote it in a novel) and.....this is the way she carried out the murder?!?
By being the obvious and only possible murderer?
How about actually planting some previous suicide hints for everyone else to remember in this trial? Why not?
If she did it, she must be the sloppiest and luckyest murderer ever.
they did that tho
shareThey did that what?
shareThe suicide hints.
shareNo they did not.
She just SAID that. There is no real hint, only hearsay by the suspected murderer. Practically useless.
The son said he found aspirin in his dad's vomit prior and he told the story about the conversation his father had with him that sounded like he was trying to prepare his son for his absence.
shareOk, again hearsay.
None of which is real evidence.
What kind of Mickey Mouse trial and investigation is this?
If anything, it would look to any average cop/prosecutor like the son is just going along with what his mom said....
do you want "hints" or real evidence??
shareWell, I mean hints that somebody can find to believe this version. So, tangible hints. Like, a phone call to the ER or doctor because he tried to kill himself with those pills.
Or the psychologist confirming that he talked about suicide.
Something objectively hinting in that direction.
Not personal tales by the suspetc(s).
The dog smelling like vomit and giving evidence of poisoning similar to what the child previously observed is, in fact, evidence. Indirect, circumstantial, but evidence. Enough, at any rate, to satisfy the child.
It strengthens the wife/mother's otherwise unsupported word. I'm not saying it was an elegant plot devise, but it does tip the scales, given what we're able to otherwise discern, against murder.
It's a lot more than the kid simply changing his tune. He took a huge risk with his beloved dog to discern, if possible, the truth of the matter.
I actually wish it had been left slightly more ambiguous.