More Russ Martin Theories

[RussFan]

I’m glad my last topic about Russ' arrest being a bit drew so much attention! Now that we’ve heard from the “it’s a bit” crowd, let’s shift gears. It’s not a bit. It’s for real. Now what?

It’s clear that most of the “it’s for real” folks would toss Russ in the pokey and throw away the key without blinking twice. He messed up. He thinks he’s a god. He thinks he’s above the law. Give us Barabbas!

Given that the situation is real, there are now two possibilities. One is that Amy’s story is completely accurate, Russ did it, and the jury will decide his fate. The other is that Amy’s story is not completely accurate, due to either flaws in perception or intentional misinformation. We’ve only heard one side of this story so far. Any thoughts on what the other side may sound like? Remember, the defense needs to establish a basis for reasonable doubt of guilt, not proof of absolute innocence.

 

[Dndsh237]

Simple...

"I didn't do it. Amy is lying".

The sad fact is, we'll never hear Russ' side of the story until "after" the legal proceedings have been completed. That could take 6 months at least...

 

[little1]

The other is that Amy’s story is not completely accurate, due to either flaws in perception or intentional misinformation. We’ve only heard one side of this story so far. Any thoughts on what the other side may sound like? Remember, the defense needs to establish a basis for reasonable doubt of guilt, not proof of absolute innocence.

Right. And so far, you've got testimony from Amy that he hit her, kicked her, pulled her hair, etc.

And to counter that, is Russ's testimony really going to be 'No i didn't'. ???

Okay, we've got he said she said. So start looking at the 'other' evidence:
Is he having IRS problems? if so doesn't that back up her story?
Has he threatened her before, told her she was going to kick her ass, whatever? If so, are there witnesses she can call who'd back it up? friends, family, etc who can tell how she has been worried before about his temper? if so, again, backs up her story.
In all those 'best of' tapes, does CBS hold any that show Russ losing his temper and yelling at someone? Shows state of mind, shows he has a temper (which backs up her side of the story). And sure they can defend it with 'that's just a bit', but at some point, the prosecution can claim that with his show you never knwo what's real and what is a bit. Sure NOW they claim it's a bit, because they have to defend against it...But they don't tell their listeners these are bits, do they? They want the listeners to believe that he's really fighting with Henry or Spittle or JD or whoever. So if they don't tell the truth on-air, why should we believe thatthey're now telling the truth in court?

Subpoena the phone records- did he call when she said he did? Subpoena the accountant- has he been having IRS problems- call anyone who has ever been pissed off by Russ (See Rhyner throw him under the bus in the DMN) to testify abouthow he's always pushingteh envelope and going a little to far. Introduce the broken laaptop into evidence. All the little pieces add up to her side-

And russ's whole defense is 'No I didn't'?

So what's his angle? That she's a pathological liar who made up the whole story and injured herself?
"Okay Mr Martin, when did you first notice these traits in your fiance? Mr Martin if your fiance was showing such signs of mental instability, did you do anything to get her help? Why did you remain engaged to someone that you believe capable of not only injuring herself, but of fabricating a story that is this damaging to your career'?

Russ's problem (IMHO) is that he's played up the EXACT traits that he's accused of here- that he's hot headed, doesn't respect women, etc, that add to th circumstantial case that backs up the testimony.

As I said somehwere else, if you took someone who's got a squeaky clean reputation (Chapman?) and accuse him of this, it'll be a lot harder to believe. But Russ? It's believable, you've got eyewitness testimony of his fiance (so not just some random chick looking for publicity or a payoff), and you've got some physical evidence that we know of (computer, pictures of her wounds) and possibly some that we don't know about (did she really tape it? do the cops have the tape?)...

And Russ's whole defense is what, Either "I didn't do it", or 'she's a lying bitch'.

 

[WhiplashChick]

i pretty much agree with you.

but

So what's his angle? That she's a pathological liar who made up the whole story and injured herself?
"Okay Mr Martin, when did you first notice these traits in your fiance? Mr Martin if your fiance was showing such signs of mental instability, did you do anything to get her help? Why did you remain engaged to someone that you believe capable of not only injuring herself, but of fabricating a story that is this damaging to your career'?

can't that be flipped around for her? "if you knew he was abusive, why did you stay?" i'm not saying that it's the right thing to do, but double standards don't help anyone.

 

[tah]

i pretty much agree with you.

but

So what's his angle? That she's a pathological liar who made up the whole story and injured herself?
"Okay Mr Martin, when did you first notice these traits in your fiance? Mr Martin if your fiance was showing such signs of mental instability, did you do anything to get her help? Why did you remain engaged to someone that you believe capable of not only injuring herself, but of fabricating a story that is this damaging to your career'?

can't that be flipped around for her? "if you knew he was abusive, why did you stay?" i'm not saying that it's the right thing to do, but double standards don't help anyone.

That one is easy. Put an expert witness on the stand to explain the behavior of domestic abusers and their victims.

And we're back to he said/she said. It all depends on what evidence both sides are holding.

 

[marksman]

See but there is not a gray area here. Either it went down close to what Amy said or else she is pretty much lying about the whole thing. Anything in between would likely still be abuse.

So it is an either/or scenario, not one where the truth might lie somewhere in the middle.

He either physically attacked her or he didn't. The rest does not matter.

So to believe Russ is not guilty you have to essentially believe Amy is lying about EVERYTHING, and for me that is where the difficulty comes in.

 

[tifchase]

Does anyone know anything about the IRS? I've wondered if they'd even discuss Russ's case with his girlfriend. I know a lot of financial institutions (credit cards, banks, car loans) won't even give information to a spouse with out the account holder's written consent. An IRS audit seems even more serious, so would the IRS have given out information to anyone other than Russ himself? (Not arguing either way here just asking) The whole premise of the fight is that she didn't get the info he wanted from the IRS so I'm curious if that was something that was even possible.

 

[tah]

Does anyone know anything about the IRS? I've wondered if they'd even discuss Russ's case with his girlfriend. I know a lot of financial institutions (credit cards, banks, car loans) won't even give information to a spouse with out the account holder's written consent. An IRS audit seems even more serious, so would the IRS have given out information to anyone other than Russ himself? (Not arguing either way here just asking) The whole premise of the fight is that she didn't get the info he wanted from the IRS so I'm curious if that was something that was even possible.

Unfortnately, I do have experience with the IRS (hubby didn't find out until after the divcorce that they (he and the ex) "forgot" to pay taxes one year : ). They will only speak with Mr. Martin or parties he designates regarding the status of his case. It's possible he could have her on the "speak to" list but given how he continually talked about money matters regarding the alleged victim, I find that unlikely.

 

[Jubb05]

Does anyone know anything about the IRS? I've wondered if they'd even discuss Russ's case with his girlfriend. I know a lot of financial institutions (credit cards, banks, car loans) won't even give information to a spouse with out the account holder's written consent. An IRS audit seems even more serious, so would the IRS have given out information to anyone other than Russ himself? (Not arguing either way here just asking) The whole premise of the fight is that she didn't get the info he wanted from the IRS so I'm curious if that was something that was even possible.

Ok first it wasn't a "fight," it was an assault. Per the arrest warrant she was to have called to verify receipt of some sort of documentation. I have a friend who is a CPA who tells me the individual dealing with the IRS has to appoint someone(s) to represent them b4 the IRS will release any information.

Couldn't he have sent the info via fed-ex so he would have had a guarantee of arrival? It's the friggin IRS for pete's sake.

 

[WhiplashChick]

i pretty much agree with you.

but

So what's his angle? That she's a pathological liar who made up the whole story and injured herself?
"Okay Mr Martin, when did you first notice these traits in your fiance? Mr Martin if your fiance was showing such signs of mental instability, did you do anything to get her help? Why did you remain engaged to someone that you believe capable of not only injuring herself, but of fabricating a story that is this damaging to your career'?

can't that be flipped around for her? "if you knew he was abusive, why did you stay?" i'm not saying that it's the right thing to do, but double standards don't help anyone.

That one is easy. Put an expert witness on the stand to explain the behavior of domestic abusers and their victims.

And we're back to he said/she said. It all depends on what evidence both sides are holding.

not all DV victims stay with the abuser. again, i'm not attacking her, just some of the goofy "logic" here.

 

[tah]

Does anyone know anything about the IRS? I've wondered if they'd even discuss Russ's case with his girlfriend. I know a lot of financial institutions (credit cards, banks, car loans) won't even give information to a spouse with out the account holder's written consent. An IRS audit seems even more serious, so would the IRS have given out information to anyone other than Russ himself? (Not arguing either way here just asking) The whole premise of the fight is that she didn't get the info he wanted from the IRS so I'm curious if that was something that was even possible.

Ok first it wasn't a "fight," it was an assault. Per the arrest warrant she was to have called to verify receipt of some sort of documentation. I have a friend who is a CPA who tells me the individual dealing with the IRS has to appoint someone(s) to represent them b4 the IRS will release any information.

Couldn't he have sent the info via fed-ex so he would have had a guarantee of arrival? It's the friggin IRS for pete's sake.

I checked out the IRS website regarding third party practices -

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=107770,00.html

 

[Jubb05]

i pretty much agree with you.

but

So what's his angle? That she's a pathological liar who made up the whole story and injured herself?
"Okay Mr Martin, when did you first notice these traits in your fiance? Mr Martin if your fiance was showing such signs of mental instability, did you do anything to get her help? Why did you remain engaged to someone that you believe capable of not only injuring herself, but of fabricating a story that is this damaging to your career'?

can't that be flipped around for her? "if you knew he was abusive, why did you stay?" i'm not saying that it's the right thing to do, but double standards don't help anyone.

That one is easy. Put an expert witness on the stand to explain the behavior of domestic abusers and their victims.

And we're back to he said/she said. It all depends on what evidence both sides are holding.

not all DV victims stay with the abuser. again, i'm not attacking her, just some of the goofy "logic" here.

Many, however, do. And there are lots of experts willing to testify as to that mindset.

 

[tah]

i pretty much agree with you.

but

So what's his angle? That she's a pathological liar who made up the whole story and injured herself?
"Okay Mr Martin, when did you first notice these traits in your fiance? Mr Martin if your fiance was showing such signs of mental instability, did you do anything to get her help? Why did you remain engaged to someone that you believe capable of not only injuring herself, but of fabricating a story that is this damaging to your career'?

can't that be flipped around for her? "if you knew he was abusive, why did you stay?" i'm not saying that it's the right thing to do, but double standards don't help anyone.

That one is easy. Put an expert witness on the stand to explain the behavior of domestic abusers and their victims.

And we're back to he said/she said. It all depends on what evidence both sides are holding.

not all DV victims stay with the abuser. again, i'm not attacking her, just some of the goofy "logic" here.

Logic would tell you that this alleged victim stayed. According to the affidavit, there had been previous incidents similar to this and she "knew it would be bad" which would mean that "something" had happened before. I would infer from that statement that she had been abused before. Whether there is evidence of that, who knows?

 

[lilly64]

Does anyone know anything about the IRS? I've wondered if they'd even discuss Russ's case with his girlfriend. I know a lot of financial institutions (credit cards, banks, car loans) won't even give information to a spouse with out the account holder's written consent. An IRS audit seems even more serious, so would the IRS have given out information to anyone other than Russ himself? (Not arguing either way here just asking) The whole premise of the fight is that she didn't get the info he wanted from the IRS so I'm curious if that was something that was even possible.

Ok first it wasn't a "fight," it was an assault. Per the arrest warrant she was to have called to verify receipt of some sort of documentation. I have a friend who is a CPA who tells me the individual dealing with the IRS has to appoint someone(s) to represent them b4 the IRS will release any information.

Couldn't he have sent the info via fed-ex so he would have had a guarantee of arrival? It's the friggin IRS for pete's sake.

Have you ever listened to his show? He doesn't do anything for himself. He has people come to the studio to cut his hair. When he first started working out he had to have the equipment set up at the station. And his lackeys call and arrange everything for him. He's got an overblown sense of entitlement.

 

[MurderOne]

Why would Russ threaten or hit Amy , all he should have done is take her for a ride and give her some DASH..... No , Seriously . If Russ did what he has been charged with , he should be held accountable .

 

[marksman]

Why would Russ threaten or hit Amy , all he should have done is take her for a ride and give her some DASH..... No , Seriously . If Russ did what he has been charged with , he should be held accountable .

I totally forgot about that other long running gag of abuse humor.

Here is the thing that pisses me off the most about this. As a previous long-term regular Russ listener, I will admit to laughing at some of these gags, bits and comments. But I did so under the belief that Russ was absolutely squeaky clean and that he would not be dumb enough to be making jokes about abusing women while actually doing it, as that would be evidence the guy is a sociopath totally devoid of a conscious. So I always figured that it was okay to laugh a bit, because Russ was really a good guy who has never even thought to raise his hand to a woman in his life. Instead I have been completely scammed and I feel dirty and disappointed with myself for every even mildly chuckling at one of his abuse jokes.

 

[RussFan]

Why would Russ threaten or hit Amy , all he should have done is take her for a ride and give her some DASH..... No , Seriously . If Russ did what he has been charged with , he should be held accountable .

I don't think anyone here is disputing that.

Russ mentioned in recent shows about breaking it off with Amy. If she was in the relationship for the money (big assumption here), and the engagement was either in jeopardy or had already been ended by Russ, then Plan 'B' could have been to drag him into a settlement situation. The IRS problems may be totally real and she might have known that failing to follow up with them would set him off. She could have calculated the cost-benefit of letting herself get hurt and probably thought it unlikely that he would go so far as to shoot her. If her life was on the line, would she really have stayed, regardless if it was a scam or not?

As for the gun, one account claims that he dropped the clip. Perhaps he was stowing the rounds because he knew he had lost control of the situation and didn't want either of them to get shot. If she was (as Russ would put it) a 'wiggy chick', like the one that drove into his garage door, who knows what she might've done.

 

[MurderOne]

I was a huge Russ fan for years , I quit listening when Howard came on Sirius.
I would tune in from time to time when Howard was on vacation , Russ was still
talking about the band , trying to get JD to say the N word and picking on Gavin.
That was funny a few years ago , for a while I thought I was listening to best of
then I thought this is not funny . I have met Russ several times , and he was always
a nice guy . I wish him the best .

 

[SirFreebie1975]

I was a huge Russ fan for years , I quit listening when Howard came on Sirius.
I would tune in from time to time when Howard was on vacation , Russ was still
talking about the band , trying to get JD to say the N word and picking on Gavin.
That was funny a few years ago , for a while I thought I was listening to best of
then I thought this is not funny . I have met Russ several times , and he was always
a nice guy . I wish him the best .

you'll be listening more after this week since Howard is taking another week vacation next week

 

[lucky1chris]

I’m glad my last topic about Russ' arrest being a bit drew so much attention! Now that we’ve heard from the “it’s a bit” crowd, let’s shift gears. It’s not a bit. It’s for real. Now what?

It’s clear that most of the “it’s for real” folks would toss Russ in the pokey and throw away the key without blinking twice. He messed up. He thinks he’s a god. He thinks he’s above the law. Give us Barabbas!

Given that the situation is real, there are now two possibilities. One is that Amy’s story is completely accurate, Russ did it, and the jury will decide his fate. The other is that Amy’s story is not completely accurate, due to either flaws in perception or intentional misinformation. We’ve only heard one side of this story so far. Any thoughts on what the other side may sound like? Remember, the defense needs to establish a basis for reasonable doubt of guilt, not proof of absolute innocence.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say he'll claim self defense. Wouldn't be the first time a woman went crazy and attacked her s/o when things headed south. Let's be honest for a moment. Who has the most to lose from the situation? 50 bucks says he claims self defense. 50 bucks says he's acquitted. Flame on.