Jump to content

Suzanne Simpson, the disappearing San Antonio realtor (UT alum)


Recommended Posts

Posted

"In his original arrest warrant, it states that the Simpson’s youngest child told a school official, “that her mom and dad were "fighting." ...she told staff that her dad had hit her mom in the face and possibly pushed her into a wall. ...she told staff that her mom had a bruise on her elbow and that her dad had taken her mom's cell phone away.""

no need to read the rest of this or any other results from yesterday - journalism is dead

https://www.news4sanantonio.com/news/local/veteran-criminal-attorney-weighs-in-on-brad-simpson-as-prime-suspect

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

This could be in the "Great Enshittening" thread but there is a fake Gofund me page being circulated using photos from friends of Suzanne.

If you see a GF page purporting to be in support of Suzanne's kids etc it is a fake.

Do not donate.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, BrazilHorn said:

This could be in the "Great Enshittening" thread but there is a fake Gofund me page being circulated using photos from friends of Suzanne.

If you see a GF page purporting to be in support of Suzanne's kids etc it is a fake.

Do not donate.

Ketch?

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 10/24/2024 at 10:07 PM, Hagbard Celine said:

Bexar County District Attorney Joe Gonzales plans to challenge a motion to change Brad Simpson’s bond conditions.

Simpson, who is facing a family violence charge, among others, is asking a Bexar County court to amend bond conditions so he can have contact with his children, his attorney said.

https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2024/10/24/bexar-county-district-attorney-plans-to-challenge-brad-simpsons-motion-to-change-bond-conditions/

 

Thats some pretty ballsy shit. "Just because I beat and murdered their mother, doesn't mean I dont deserve to spend time with them."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 10/24/2024 at 4:12 PM, Surly Bevo said:

Did you see the monuments on The Mall at night?  That's the best time to go.  

No, he never actually left Austin, so the only monuments he visited were these. 

Spoiler

image.thumb.jpeg.fdc1b401716092527d0a2b898e8069ca.jpeg

 

  • Haha 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Cousin Strawberry said:

Thats some pretty ballsy shit. "Just because I beat and murdered their mother, doesn't mean I dont deserve to spend time with them."

Yeah. They’re probably not gonna let you talk to material witnesses you have parental control over, Sherlock.

Posted
20 hours ago, Updawg said:

Who do you want telling the kids their mom was murdered by their dad? The government? This election is about parents rights

/sorry if cr

I will require more time to think about the sock puppets involved.

Posted
8 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I don't think it's common but it's not unheard of

Yeah, if there is enough evidence against someone, they can still go forward without a body.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 hours ago, chainsaw said:

I don't think it's common but it's not unheard of

6 hours ago, kevwun said:

Yeah, if there is enough evidence against someone, they can still go forward without a body.

Sweating James Mcavoy GIF

15 minutes ago, SameSame said:

So if they try him without a body and don't get a conviction, they can't try him again if they find the body, like that Ashley Judd movie.  Is that right?

Happy Oh Yeah GIF

  • Haha 3
Posted
13 hours ago, kevwun said:

Yeah, if there is enough evidence against someone, they can still go forward without a body.

Yeah, it's kind of like "motive, means, and opportunity."  It's not something that's an element of the crime, precisely (you do have to prove that the defendant caused death), but it's something you may need to convince a jury that the murder actually happened.  What lawdogs call the burden of persuasion more than the burden of proof.

Posted
8 minutes ago, Scary Stranger said:

Oh, wow.  I dated a Suzanne Clark back in the day.  Not that one.  The one I dated got put in the federal pokey for embezzling money from Perot Systems a couple of years after we broke up.

Hopefully, you were able to help her spend some of that sweet Perot money before y'all broke up.

Posted
2 hours ago, Scary Stranger said:

Oh, wow.  I dated a Suzanne Clark back in the day.  Not that one.  The one I dated got put in the federal pokey for embezzling money from Perot Systems a couple of years after we broke up.

Uh-huh. Sounds like something a jilted rat would say....

  • Haha 1
Posted
5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, it's kind of like "motive, means, and opportunity."  It's not something that's an element of the crime, precisely (you do have to prove that the defendant caused death), but it's something you may need to convince a jury that the murder actually happened.  What lawdogs call the burden of persuasion more than the burden of proof.

If I'm on a murder trial jury, there's got to be a body to get a conviction. Or at least a pool of the victim's blood that's large enough to determine that they couldn't live after losing that much blood. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, Sandman said:

If I'm on a murder trial jury, there's got to be a body to get a conviction. Or at least a pool of the victim's blood that's large enough to determine that they couldn't live after losing that much blood. 

Which means you would never make it onto a murder trial jury where a body had not been found.

Posted
Just now, royiv said:

Which means you would never make it onto a murder trial jury where a body had not been found.

If they're smart enough to ask about that during jury selection, you're right. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Sandman said:

If they're smart enough to ask about that during jury selection, you're right. 

In a bunch of cases the victim is presumed dead. Like imagine two people go into the woods or out to sea, but only one returns. I don't know the number off the top of my head but after a certain number of days, you can know with mathematical certainty that they are no longer alive.

I'm guessing the judge would basically force the jury to assume the victim is dead. Still hard, I guess, to say that the defendant was the cause of death and did it on purpose, but it gets easier when there's all this other stuff about how he was fighting with her and previously abusive. I don't think they would have brought murder charges unless they had some Kaitlin Armstrong-like evidence showing where he was at all times on the evening in question. Tracking his cars, trucks, phones, accounts, and reviewing surveillance from everywhere they know he had been on that evening and the other days before and after.

By the time they charged Armstrong they'd gotten audio of the gunshots from a neighbor's Ring camera, video of the Jeep she was using, and the Jeep had some kind of GPS on it she forgot to disable. Of course, the ballistics matched up with her gun too and she had a track record of being controlling, envious, and specifically envious of the victim.

I hope the detectives have similar evidence on Brad. If they've got all that, I'm not that worried about a lack of a body.

Edited by chainsaw

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...