This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Oldest First
  • canucmypointofview May 22, 9:25 a.m.

    @kikinc: I too think there are too many people that were overlooked in this investigation to make this jury locked into a guilty conviction. But then again, look how many swingers were overlooked in the Cooper trial!

  • datenobunaga2 May 21, 4:19 p.m.

    It all sounds like sloppy police work and legal representation. If it is stored in evidence, then it would be listed as recovered, in response to the search warrant.

    It was lost for some time, that is why no one could review it. It didn't miraculously materialize until the trial was underway. This to me, is more of an eye brow raiser on behalf of the state. This is exactly what the defense has been trying to point out, sloppy police work, and of course the state wants to protect its own.

  • Milkman May 21, 4:19 p.m.

    What other exculpatory evidence is "locked away" at the DPD or intentionally destroyed? I don't know if this guy is guilty or not, but I do really want him to have a fair and just trial!

    So far, I'm pretty sure he's not gotten one.

  • Mom2two May 21, 4:06 p.m.

    It all sounds like sloppy police work and legal representation. If it is stored in evidence, then it would be listed as recovered, in response to the search warrant. Obviously, no one bothered to review it prior to trial...not the defense or the prosecution. Just sloppy...pretty typical of all I have seen of Durham.

  • kikinc May 21, 3:13 p.m.

    So I just read the emails. I think they should have looked at her ex-boyfriend's girlfriend at the time. It's said that if the current girlfriend had known the exes had seen each other and were still corresponding, Janet would probably get a beat down. And those emails were pretty flirty. I do think that if they had been released earlier, this trial would have been different.

  • JustOneGodLessThanU May 21, 3:13 p.m.

    "For three weeks, prosecutors have portrayed [the husband] as an unfaithful, verbally abusive and controlling husband feared by his wife."

    Different stroke for different folks. This describes a billion Mid-East families.

    Ok, so he's mean, sexist and scared her...but prove the murder. At least explain the unknown DNA, blood & hand/finger prints.

    Everything else is just a distraction, fluff, that won't help with the "reasonable doubt" in the jury room.

  • rlee1117 May 21, 3:09 p.m.

    He will be found guilty just watch! It is like some of the others with no proof that still got found guilty!

  • whatelseisnew May 21, 3:08 p.m.

    This is why all of this stuff should never come into the court room. It is all very simple; EITHER the State has compelling evidence that will get the Jury to issue a guilty verdict, or it does not. All this other stuff is just a waste of time, and I can tell you it is very irritating to sit on a Jury and be forced to listen to this kind of nonsense. I sat on a jury where both sides spent most of the testimony time trying to make each side look bad. We heard the only MEANINGFUL testimony from the ME, a Police officer, and two eye witnesses. All the other garbage was wasted time.

  • canucmypointofview May 21, 3:01 p.m.

    Somebody help me out: If you are charged with first degree murder, can the judge tell the jury that they can consider other things instead, like manslaughter? Seems like I remember that happening in one of the other "the husband did it" cases...

  • veroprior May 21, 2:16 p.m.

    Do they not realize that these emails give Raven even more motive to kill her? If she was (or he thought she was) fooling around? It might mitigate from first degree, but it's not going to get him off the hook.

  • canucmypointofview May 21, 1:45 p.m.

    "@canucmypointofview: no forced entry, only thing missing was Raven's computer which had some pretty damning things on it. It's pretty clear who murdered Janet, and the dumb bird has been allowed to run away from it for far too long.
    jenlee81" That may very well be, but from the emails (which you can read in this motion for dismissal link) sounds to me like she'd would have GLADLY let Scott in...probably for another massage! Those emails are NOT from a girl that was "just a shell of her former self" like everybody has said.

  • Obamacare survives May 21, 1:39 p.m.

    Good thing the mystery killer stole Raven's laptop after slashing his wife.

  • rushbot May 21, 1:32 p.m.

    I remind every one that he needs to be found guilty without any shadow of doubt...

  • jenlee81 May 21, 1:30 p.m.

    @canucmypointofview: no forced entry, only thing missing was Raven's computer which had some pretty damning things on it. It's pretty clear who murdered Janet, and the dumb bird has been allowed to run away from it for far too long.

  • TheoryGirl May 21, 1:24 p.m.

    So isn't it possible that Janet was "bragging on her husband" to an ex-boyfriend instead of saying "yep, I messed up, I should be with you". I think some would consider this to be preventing an uncomfortable situation. Why should the ex-boyfriend need to know or why should Janet need to admit to an ex-boyfriend that she was married to an unfaithful, verbally and emotionally abusive man. I think that there were plenty of other people in Janet's life who knew the truth.

    The fact that there is only circumstantial evidence speaks more to the fact of murder 1. Means that Raven had more time (the Monday and Friday he was off of work perhaps) to plan how he would get rid of the evidence.

  • ripetomatoes May 21, 12:48 p.m.

    Is there any evidence in this trial or will the verdict be based on insinuations?

  • Obamacare survives May 21, 12:45 p.m.

    According to all of our resident web sleuths in here, the husband is never guilty in these cases and it's always some mysterious intruder who commits the murders even though statistics prove otherwise. Give me break.

    Lock him up for life.

  • canucmypointofview May 21, 12:40 p.m.

    Now, wait a minute. Could be just as true that she did NOT meet the boyfriend as planned, and HE got mad and killed her. Without him being investigated, how can that be ruled out?? Scott said in those emails that he was jealous of Raven...maybe a "if I can't have you, neither can he" situation...too much doubt in this case (as it's been presented to the jury) to send a man to prison for life IMO.

  • Ambygirl May 21, 12:29 p.m.

    Sorry, this just gives a motive for the husband to kill the wife in a jealous rage. He found out what was going on and snapped. I didn't think it was over money to begin with.

  • InTheNo May 21, 12:24 p.m.

    so, another case of an innocent husband being railroaded by local barney fifes. couldn't get much more obvious than this case and brad cooper's case.

  • umop apisdn May 21, 12:14 p.m.

    "Wow, this woman was either lying or completely clueless."

    I'm pretty sure that email messages aren't hard evidence. I, for example, write an email saying the same thing about you. It doesn't make it true.

    "why were only "fragments" found?"

    Information stored on hard drives may found in a number of places. IOW, a file, depending on its size, may be stored in different areas of the hard drive. If the file is deleted it doesn't go away it's pieces are marked as available. Some parts may have been overwritten while others remained intact. When recovering computer evidence sometimes it's just the luck of the draw on what you get.

    "Husband's motive!!!!"

    I have to agree, sounds more like the defense is providing the motive.

  • aquamarine46 May 21, 12:03 p.m.

    Husband's motive!!!!

  • Obamacare survives May 21, 12:03 p.m.

    "He's pretty funny, but I do like that I can be honest with him and tell him anything."

    Wow, this woman was either lying or completely clueless.

  • JAT May 21, 11:53 a.m.

    why were only "fragments" found?

Oldest First