PRETTY MURDER; TALE OF TWO TRIALS

I watched an episode of MSNBC last night and it had me floored! This pretty lady here was convicted of murdering her husband and then acquited of NOT murdering her husband… If you ask me, she’s as guilty as Osama Bin Laden.

The Facts:

Elicia Hughes was a third grade teacher with a cheating husband and two kids. One night her husband ends up dead a few feet away from the doorway. Shots to his groin, torso and all around his arms. Elicia and the children were all home at the time of the shooting. The girls: aged 3 and 4, slept through it all. He was shot with a .45. She has 3 family members throughout the city in law enforcement.

Her story:

Fell asleep reading in the foyer about 5 feet away from the entrance where husband was shot. Remembers being awaken by the gun shots – followed by the alarm. Saw her hubby on the floor and thought he was ‘intoxicated’ and passed out. Shook him asking him to give her the code to the alarm – because for some reason – she didn’t know it. Only after she heard his moans did she realize that he was shot. ?????????

First Trial:

Gun powder residue on her hands, no sign according to the neighbors -whom the shots awakened as well- of anyone fleeing the scene. Being as though Mr. Hughes was such a safety nut none of his family members could even see him opening the door late at night. She was being repeatedly cheated on – his mistress had gotten pregnant and lost the baby – she gained to come into 250,000 upon his death.

Guilty.

The sweet faced well mannered Mrs. Hughes spent close to two months in jail. The judge in her trial, however, didn’t feel she received a ‘fair trial’ as the jury wasn’t ‘diverse’ enough.

Second Trial:

This trial has all the makings of the first trial except for two new witnesses. One for the defense and one for the prosecution. For the prosecution: Mr. Hughes’ mistress took the stand and says she was on the phone with him when he entered the house. According to her he said, “Let me call you back” a code that his wife was in the room. For the defense: A neighbor comes forward and says after the shooting, minutes later she hears a car skid away into the night. Great. They tear up the mistress’ story because she didn’t say in her written statement that she asked her lover, after he said he would talk to her later, if his wife was in the room. To which she says he answered, “yes.” But of course. So now her story is torn apart but you believe defense’s new witness that all of a sudden remembered hearing a car screech away…. I mean, was she in Siberia when the first trial was going on???

Not Guilty.

One juror says at first she thought she was as guilty as sin, but as she sat there looking at this pretty little 3rd grade teacher – she didn’t LOOK like she could do it. What an idiot. What in the hell do looks have to do with a woman scorned getting some revenge on her do no good husband??? What do looks have to do with murder at ALL???? The gun powder on the back of her hands was never really explained – the motive behind anyone else killing him was never revealed – the fact that she never once went to check on her babies when there was an alleged ‘intruder’ in the house moments before stumps me – her visit to the pharmacy the day prior – when she most likely bought the cough meds or what have you that knocked those babies out so hard that night – was why she wasn’t worried about them. Maybe I’m wrong, but from where I’m sitting -

She looks damn guilty.

~Roule