Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 16 · column 5 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
have seen Mrs. Larimer smoke.”
Called back to the stand, Mrs. Larimer was asked by her attorney: “Have you ever smoked (marijuana) in front of the kids?” “No sir,” was her firm reply.
In his closing statement, Mr. Luke admitted that the case was a matter of “Eastham and Grohs telling it one way; Mrs. Larimer and her kids telling it another.” He admitted that the two had entered into plea agreements: “Sometimes we have to make a deal—I’m not trying to hide that.” But, he added, the Commonwealth had no evidence to implicate Mrs. Larimer until they came forward. He questioned their motive for lying in implicating Mrs. Larimer.
Mr. Luke also acknowledged that the allegations against Mrs. Larimer were “bizarre, hard to believe, that a mother would have her children do something like this.” He insisted, however, that the very “bizarreness” of the circumstances tended to corroborate Eastham’s and Grohs’ version of the story.
In summation for the defense, Mr. Payne stressed the fact that Eastham and Grohs had given several different versions of the events of February 28. He said that “no credible evidence was presented. This was a lark, not a well-planned crime. Their (Eastham and Grohs) biggest motive was a plea deal. Those kids could have said anybody—isn’t that the truth—that could have been anyone in that chair,” he said, pointing at the defendant. “The credibility of the witnesses is the most important consideration in your deliberations.”
After deliberating about one hour and 15 minutes, the jury returned to the courtroom to announce that they had found Mrs. Larimer not guilty on both charges.
97.4%