I was called in to testify yesterday against Michael Terpening. I wasn't in court long, about 15 minutes on the witness stand.
The questioning was limited and Angela wanted to focus on Terpening's comment to have Rodney continuing lying after finding out that Rodney admitted to me the recant was a lie. They addressed Jamie Moore Bell's pressure to influence Rodney and have contact with him (witness tampering?). When Angela asked me about Rodney's admission regarding the recant, defense attorneys were quick to object, which Judge McDowell sustained based on 'hearsay.'
Defense attorneys had nothing worthwhile to ask in the cross-examination. They are trying to show Rodney as a pathological liar, even though his behavior is typical of sexual abuse victims. They asked me questions about smoking marijuana (which has nothing to do with this case, anyway). I believe that they are trying to discredit me because of my personal recreational habits. The only question the jury asked me was if I possessed a medical marijuana card.
Both defense attorneys were quite irritated and 'huffy', so to speak. Were they just irritated (I would be if I were them)? Or, is that how defense attorneys act to try to intimidate witnesses? If the second is the case, then Terpening selected well to suit the type of man he truly is.
It would seem like Terpening would take the plea deal, now that the DNA results came back. Up to 10 years is better than life...