The Defense

The Defense

The defense will soon have the floor.
We know that their basis of refuting the prosecution's claims is that an unknown intruder entered the Roseboro property on July 22, 2008 and beat, strangled and drowned Jan Roseboro in a successful attempt to steal her jewelry. They claim the jewelry in question is valued at approximately $40,000.

We will learn if anyone recalls seeing Jan wear the jewelry in question in the hours immediately preceding her death.
We will learn when the first claim was made that the jewelry was no longer on her person or in her possession or that of the hospital, morgue or family.

For a robber to have committed this crime, he or she must have been enraged at some point in the commission of the crime. The injuries that Jan received, save for the head wound, were committed by bare hands. This was, indeed, a personal attack.
If the jewelry was the object of the crime and attack, when was it taken from Jan?
Does anyone really think that Jan would have not thrown the jewelry at her attacker to get the beating to stop?
Jan's priority wouldn't have been her jewelry. If she was being robbed, she would have willingly given up anything to stay alive for her children.
Jan fought back. That much is evident. No amount of jewelry would have made her fight for her life. The attack wouldn't have progressed to that point.
Facing an attacker the way she did that night, the only thing on her mind would have been her children.
There was a rage and no brakes in the attack she suffered.
Robbers usually don't plan on killing their victims. They rob. Sometimes when things go badly, they become killers.
Did the alleged robbers see the jewelry on Jan as she was out by the pool?
Or did they spot her earlier in the day and lay in wait in the dark, out on Creek Road?
Why wouldn't they have held her at gunpoint or knifepoint, demanding she hand over the jewelry quietly "and no one gets hurt."?
Purse snatchings are done with bare hands. They are quick, instantaneous and over in a very short period of time.
The snatchers don't wrestle with their victims long, even when the victim puts up a fight.
Robberies are quick as well. The goal is to get in. get the stuff, and get out.
Robbers don't hang around and continue to beat the life out of their victims. Once the bounty is taken, it's over and they make a hasty getaway.
Which makes me ask this...if this was a robbery, why did it have to go on until Jan was floating in the swimming pool? Did the robber and Jan end up in the pool, where he or she then removed the rest of the jewelry?
I believe that if faced with the fight that Jan did put up, as much as she could have, once struck so viciously in the back of the head, the robber would have cut his or her losses and left in a hurry......
But instead, we are to believe that the robber took all the time needed to not only rob Jan but to make sure she was left for dead in the pool? And they only left after ALL of the jewelry had been taken?
Just some thoughts....