Upcoming Grand Jury - Interview

[nibblet]

There is a new interview on the CourtTV Crime Library site where Janet talks of the upcoming grand jury.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/0106/1201_taylor_behl_grand_jury_1.html




:read:

I am very anxious to see what the Grand Jury does. Thanks for the link nib! :seeya:

4 days to go...Hello Lady Justice, you beautiful girl...Have we ever been waiting for you...

Get ready Ben, she's coming for you...your lies won't help you now...

Janet, my thoughts and prayers are with you, and all of Taylors loved ones.



:rose: :rose: :rose:

For Taylor

[LADY2NOW]

This report appeared on Richmond's NBC 12 news at 6 p.m.

http://www.nbc12.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WWBT/MGArticle/WBT_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128769304120

[protectkidz]

Thanks, Lady.

Dammit, why can't these people keep their mouths shut. HE is jeopardizing the case by commenting. He says it's "far from a slam dunk", etc.

Among his comments:

"Among the information has already come to light. Sources say Fawley told police Behl died by accident during rough sex. Hicks won’t comment directly, but says that could pose a snag. Hicks says, “If a jury believes that is what actually happened, then absolutely, you can end the case up at best with a manslaughter, and perhaps even a not guilty in that particular instance."

why PLANT that kind of prejudicial information in potential jurors minds? I swear this is one of those things that just drives me out of my mind!

Sorry for venting.

[Hey Paula]

Originally posted by Rowan Again
Dammit, why can't these people keep their mouths shut. HE is jeopardizing the case by commenting. He says it's "far from a slam dunk", etc.

Among his comments:

"Among the information has already come to light. Sources say Fawley told police Behl died by accident during rough sex. Hicks won’t comment directly, but says that could pose a snag. Hicks says, “If a jury believes that is what actually happened, then absolutely, you can end the case up at best with a manslaughter, and perhaps even a not guilty in that particular instance."

why PLANT that kind of prejudicial information in potential jurors minds? I swear this is one of those things that just drives me out of my mind!

Sorry for venting.

Don't worry because I think this sentence might have the potential to convict the slimy murderer, Fawley.

"Hicks doesn't want to jeopardize the case, but says there's still some information that hasn't made its way into the public."

Originally posted by Hey Paula


Don't worry because I think this sentence might have the potential to convict the slimy murderer, Fawley.

"Hicks doesn't want to jeopardize the case, but says there's still some information that hasn't made its way into the public."

Hey lady! :seeya:

I hope you're right. Do you understand where I'm coming from? I don't want any jurors tainted so there will be no QUESTION about the conviction.

[vedder]

I think his history of VIOLENCE towards woman will be a huge factor..

We know of at LEAST 2 girls who can testify that he had "choked" them "out of ANGER"

Than we have the stupid "abduction" alibi
The numerous lies to LE(ala Scott Peterson)
The joining the search and handing out the flyers incident(ala Scott Peterson again)
Leaving Taylor in the woods for a MONTH hoping the whole thing would just go away...
Did not show ONE bit of remorse(ala...)

It has been stated here many times...These are NOT the actions of an "innocent" man

I have a tough time believing that after hearing all of this, the jury could actually belive it was an "accident"

For Janet and Taylors sake, I pray to God I'm right....

[nibblet]

I just hope Taylor isn't wrongly trashed by the defense in order to save this piece of whiny garbage. But, sadly it happens in cases such as this one. :flamemad:

Then again, it could backfire on the defense. Look how many strangers have come to her and Janet's defense on this board? I can only hope when the trial occurs, the jury will feel the same way.

Let's hope all his violence against women gets in one way or the other.

Maybe Hick's wanted to caution everyone so he wouldn't get caught up like CA state AG Bill Lockyer's slam dunk comment during the Laci Peterson case.

BTW, I am reading Sharon Rocha's book - very touching. I am at December 24, 2002.

[vedder]

Originally posted by nibblet
I just hope Taylor isn't wrongly trashed by the defense in order to save this piece of whiny garbage. But, sadly it happens in cases such as this one. :flamemad:

Then again, it could backfire on the defense. Look how many strangers have come to her and Janet's defense on this board? I can only hope when the trial occurs, the jury will feel the same way.

Let's hope all his violence against women gets in one way or the other.

Maybe Hick's wanted to caution everyone so he wouldn't get caught up like CA state AG Bill Lockyer's slam dunk comment during the Laci Peterson case.

BTW, I am reading Sharon Rocha's book - very touching. I am at December 24, 2002.

I read the whole thing yesterday.Very,very moving...
Just make sure you have a box of tissues nearby

While I was reading I could not help but think of Janet.

I hope she gets a chance to read it.Sharons strength and relentless resolve was truly inspiring....

[Hey Paula]

Originally posted by nibblet
I just hope Taylor isn't wrongly trashed by the defense in order to save this piece of whiny garbage. But, sadly it happens in cases such as this one. :flamemad:

Then again, it could backfire on the defense. Look how many strangers have come to her and Janet's defense on this board? I can only hope when the trial occurs, the jury will feel the same way.

Let's hope all his violence against women gets in one way or the other.

Maybe Hick's wanted to caution everyone so he wouldn't get caught up like CA state AG Bill Lockyer's slam dunk comment during the Laci Peterson case.

BTW, I am reading Sharon Rocha's book - very touching. I am at December 24, 2002.

Hi Nibblet! :seeya:

This is what concerns me, and that I want so much for Taylor and Janet to be shielded from.

I hate that the Def is allowed to trash victims, even when such allegations are totally groundless. That they can do this with impunity, in their attempts to earn acquittals is very disturbing, most especially because the victims cannot defend themselves against such allegations.

In BF's case, between his involvement in child porn and history of violence towards women, along wit his weird internet musings, I think the jury will come to know the real Ben Fawley in all his evil.

BF claimed Taylor accompanied him to Mathews Co. If such a timed piece of evidence exists, which proves BF stopped for gas while on his way there (in lieu of his return trip) that can be powerful evidence against him, since the gas attendant claims BF was alone.

Taylor and Janet are in my thoughts and prayers daily. I pray justice will be served swiftly.

Sharon Rocha's book is wonderful. Her love for Laci, and the pain she endures daily without her, leap out of every page. Although I love the book, I am finding it exceeding difficult to read, as it is emotionally draining for me to read, and feel, another mother's pain.

As always, it's wonderful to see you!

[Hey Paula]

Originally posted by Rowan Again


Hey lady! :seeya:

I hope you're right. Do you understand where I'm coming from? I don't want any jurors tainted so there will be no QUESTION about the conviction.

Well at least BF, and his lawyer, can't say the jury was tainted with information which adversely affected them, denying BF a fair trial.

:seeya:

[Dorkette]

Hi posters,

I wonder where Hicks is getting HIS information - it isn't the same as my information. I am thinking 1st degree murder not capital murder. Maybe Hicks is looking for some attention.

Guess we will just have to wait and see what comes out of the Grand Jury and hearing.

Of course the defense is going to try and trash my daughter but anyone that really knows her will know the truth.
And this is one of the parts of the trial that will be so difficult for me to hear.

Thanks for your continued postings!

Dorkette

Originally posted by Dorkette
Hi posters,

I wonder where Hicks is getting HIS information - it isn't the same as my information. I am thinking 1st degree murder not capital murder. Maybe Hicks is looking for some attention.

Guess we will just have to wait and see what comes out of the Grand Jury and hearing.

Of course the defense is going to try and trash my daughter but anyone that really knows her will know the truth.
And this is one of the parts of the trial that will be so difficult for me to hear.

Thanks for your continued postings!

Dorkette

Good morning Janet :)

I don't know why he's talking to be honest with you. I understand he's not bound by the gag order anymore, but it seems to me that in the interests of justice, he would remain silent until after the trial. Just my thoughts. Any question of tainted jury pools makes the hackles rise on my neck.

As far as the defense trashing Taylor .. I suppose we should all be prepared for that to some degree. I can't imagine what that must feel like to you. Please understand that most of us here feel that Taylor was a normal, healthy, happy 17 year old. Teenagers are curious and inquisitive and experimental. They like to test the boundaries. It's normal. For her to be described as anything else is just not true. We know it, and you know it. So regardless of what negatives you might hear, just keep that which you know in your heart in your head as well.

And remember this - as unpleasant as it is - the defense has a fiduciary duty to their client to defend him to the best of the ability. I find that time has shown that the most heinous criminals usually must rely on discrediting the victims in order to make ANY case for themselves.

You hang in there. Remember. It's all for Taylor. You're her voice.

Rowan

[Belsma]

Just skimming, but I think whoever the Jurors may be will have already heard that it was "accidental", and bfs attorney is going to display it that way. Sure, unfortunatly Taylors name is going to be dragged through the mud, because they are going on what bf tells. We all know he is "innocent" according to himself and it's everybody elses fault that this happened. Personally, I don't give a rats *** IF--a huge IF, if Taylor was drunk or on drugs or whatever. This guy is old enough to be her dad for crying out loud. Even IF Taylor was attracted to him for some unknown reason he should have said, "you know that's sweet, but...." Whatever. Sorry I know the name Taylor Behl, because if I had not she would be 7 miles down the road enjoying college life....uuhhhggg.

Originally posted by Veracity


Don't apologize for that post! It was fantastic!
Any chance it is strategy to try and make the defense think they don't have to work as hard?

I don't know. I'd like to believe there is some altruistic motive Veracity, but what comes to mind a la Peterson is everyone having their 15 minutes of fame at Taylor's expense. Sickens me.

BTW, thank you :)

[nibblet]

Originally posted by Hey Paula


Sharon Rocha's book is wonderful. Her love for Laci, and the pain she endures daily without her, leap out of every page. Although I love the book, I am finding it exceeding difficult to read, as it is emotionally draining for me to read, and feel, another mother's pain.



:seeya: Hey Paula! - You are right about Sharon's book - I read a significant amount from Dec 24, 2002 into the trial last night. I wiped the tears off my glass lenses so many times that I managed to loosen the screw on my glasses and the lense popped out. I'm glad Sharon had so many good friends and family and especially Kim Petersen of the Sund/Carrington Foundation, who stopped whatever she was doing, made calls, and accommodated Sharon's needs.


I wish I could find one of my last posts from last fall regarding what I thought might have happened to Taylor that night. I gave up on the idea that she contacted BF for a skateboard. I believe Taylor was on her way to her car and encountered BF.

I think he had been on a downward spiral since Erin's breakup with him - his internet rants and trashing of Erin, the break-in of Erin's apartment in the middle of the night with a hammer and a can of mace resulting in a(nother) court hearing scheduled to occur a few days after Taylor disappeared; his posting on a site seeking a ride out of Richmond to "help" Katrina victims a day or two before Taylor disappeared (and thus missing his court date) --the guy appeared to be a bit desperate.

If Taylor rejected any of his advances that night, I can see where he wigged out and attacked her -- displaced anger towards Erin and his inability to handle any type of rejection from women at that time. His history of attacking and choking women -- Jessica Payton and the lady who ended up returning to Poland weren't sex games but a near lethal loss of self control. I do wonder if he partook in alcohol or drugs that night prior to seeing Taylor (and how much), as he was very incoherent to the officer who took his "abduction" report the next afternoon.

I never felt Taylor willingly went with him to Mathews that night. I'm curious when he stopped to buy the gas and how much he bought. Was it on the way to Mathews or the return to Richmond? I just hope the real story comes out in the trial.

Janet - Tuesday begins the next round of rough rides - you are a lot stronger today than in the past weeks and months and you will be even more stronger in the days and weeks to come than today. Also, make sure you are taking care yourself and eating right. We all are here for support and prayers -

[Hey Paula]

Great post Nibblet! :beer:

I agree with every word of it!

I think, given the fact Fawley admitted to having caused Taylor's demise, that LE had quite a bit of evidence, including FE, that they had amassed against him.

I believe the Def will try to mount a defense, based upon BF not taking his meds, and will try to use that as a mitigating factor to his horrendous crime. But in the end, I believe the jury will recognize BF for the dangerous person he is, and remove him from society, where he will no longer be able to prey on children.

There is never a day that goes by that Taylor and Janet are not in my thoughts and prayers. I wish I could be in the courtroom to offer my support physically. However, since I cannot, I will follow this case to its end, post on this board, and do whatever I can to lend my moral support.

:rose: In Loving Memory of Taylor

:rose: For Janet

[Jennifer33]

:beer:
We will be there in spirit Janet...there's no doubt you will feel our strenght sitting around you in that court house.

[singlesix]

"I wonder where Hicks is getting HIS information "

I imagine he still knows a few people at, or associated with, the Commonwealth Attorney's office after running it for, what, 12 years.

I also imagine that after investing a lot of time and energy in this case he has no intention of fouling it up by speaking without thinking first.

There will be games played within games so we should get used to it.

OTOH, Skulz is a proven liar. Everybody in Richmond above the age of 9 must know it and no amount of fast talking, or a smear campaign, can erase that fact.

singlesix