In the Prosecutor's Sentencing Memorandum, presented to the judge at sentencing, Bloodsworth states, "The Aggravated Murder’s impact extends beyond Eric Richins’ family. Josh Grossman bears the weight of knowing that he contributed to the Defendant’s motivation to murder Eric." Thoughts?
The trial was well run and Kouri is unlikely to get a reversal/new trial. But no trial is perfect. Assume you’re retained to handle the appeal. What’s your lead argument?
I’ll start:
I think the most questionable ruling was allowing Kouri’s friend Chelsea Barney to testify in detail about saving her tip money, giving her accumulated savings to Kouri to buy the house, and then losing it because of fraud by Kouri.
I’m not saying it’s a super strong argument—I suspect one does exist—but a couple of issues can be raised about Chelsea’s testimony. First, her emotional story was prejudicial and not probative of a fact but instead constituted prohibited character evidence. Second, it was cumulative of the detailed financial testimony by the state’s expert.
I have not seen this written about anywhere. It must exist, right and just not being released yet?
Does anyone know the value of the life insurance policies? I keep hearing they are evidence she was planning on murdering them as well, but as a parent with a $10k policy on my child (funeral expenses) I am not so sure this is a reasonable criticism. Wouldn't their social security fund some of her plans while their existence proped up her facade/access to any trust funds? Or were they large value policies she could cash in by picking off her own children?