PDA

View Full Version : Q for legal eagles, Re: Brenda Andrew / James Pavatt murder


47straight
2/27/2006, 03:18 PM
To members of the legal community, particularly in Oklahoma, but for anyone who is familiar with the murder case of Robert Andrew.


It seems to me that Brenda Andrew's sister, Kim Bowlin, was complicit in helping her get away after the fact. Her husband was caught with the kids coming through the border back in the US, and Bonnie and Clyde were a few cars back. Kim Bowlin was waiting at a hotel for the kids.

Now, it wouldn't matter to me except her shameless displays to the press, such as "Don't be so quick to judge my sister," and "She would never do anything to endanger her children" (except kill their dad in the next room, I presume), and suing for custody of them over Robert's parents.

My question - why wasn't she nailed to the wall for obstruction of justice, accomplice after the fact (or whatever it is called in the Oklahoma statutes)?
Hatfield
2/27/2006, 03:21 PM
we had already spent too much money on the nichols trial.
47straight
2/27/2006, 03:24 PM
we had already spent too much money on the nichols trial.

I thought that was what they were saying the lottery was going to be used for!
jk the sooner fan
2/27/2006, 03:28 PM
its unlikely the police would rely on statements made to the press - she'd have to directly interfere with their investigation for obstruction

no idea if there was enough for anything else you mentioned
47straight
2/27/2006, 03:46 PM
its unlikely the police would rely on statements made to the press - she'd have to directly interfere with their investigation for obstruction

The statements to the press just ****ed me off, I don't think they were illegal in and of themselves.

It's pretty clear she was in contact with them, had conspired to help her, and hadn't given any of that info to the cops. Anything she did before they were charged (when they were escaping - going to Mexico, as opposed to escaping - coming back from Mexico) might not be against the law, but that's what I'm asking about.
jk the sooner fan
2/27/2006, 03:47 PM
believe it or not, lying to the police is not considered obstruction

false statements of course, but not obstruction......