CourtTV experts call Jones’ closing ‘excellent,’ say Tim Bliefnick had ‘worst possible defense ever’

Play Video

QUINCY — Commentators on CourtTV Wednesday afternoon were complimentary of Assistant State’s Attorney Josh Jones’ closing statement in the Tim Bliefnick trial while suggesting the defendant change his last name to “Disbelief-nick.”

Tim Bliefnick is accused of shooting Becky Bliefnick multiple times at her Kentucky Road home on Feb. 23. Tim was arrested on March 13 and later charged with two counts of first-degree murder and one count of home invasion. He remains in the Adams County Jail without bond.

The jury received the case and started deliberations at approximately 12:30 p.m. in Adams County Circuit Court.

CourtTV was once on cable television but was relaunched in 2019 as a digital broadcast network that is available on YouTube TV and Pluto TV. Court TV was given permission to broadcast Wednesday morning’s closing statements by Jones and defense attorney Casey Schnack, then host Ted Rowlands asked experts Fil Waters with the Houston Police Department and Darryl Cohen, a defense attorney and former prosecutor in the Atlanta area, for their thoughts about the case.

Waters said the circumstance was largely circumstantial.

“I think the most damaging part of the evidence is, of course, the casings that were found,” he said. “That’s pretty direct firearms evidence.”

He also noted that Tim and Becky were married for 14 years, and that Becky was shot 14 times.

“That was something that came across to me that was kind of profound in terms of the actual act of committing the murder,” Waters said.

Rowlands asked Cohen how Schnack did with the cards in her hand.

“When you have no cards, you play whatever you can do, do whatever you can,” Cohen said. “A couple of things come to mind. One, I think his last name should be changed to Disbelief-nick, which is far more suited to him than Bliefnick. Number two, I’ve been trying to get Google to explain to me how to get rid of gunshot residue, and I can’t figure it out any more than he did.

“He has the worst possible defense ever. And by the way, I thought his lawyer was interesting. If you’re representing someone charged in a capital felony as a defendant, why in the world would you wear stripes? Is that telling the jury subliminally, ‘Please convict my client even though I’m saying don’t’? … He’s got a major problem. I agree, 14 shots for 14 years, one shot per year. A coincidence? Not at all. This guy is guilty. There’s enough enough evidence that I think a jury would be hard pressed to find him not guilty. I don’t see any doubt, much less any reasonable doubt.”

Both experts thought Jones was “invested” in the case and showed that through his emotions during the closing statement.

“I thought the prosecution’s final closing was excellent,” Waters said. “Help her. Give her justice. He didn’t say it quite that way, but that’s what he meant. It’s the only way. You don’t get mad, you get even. Getting even in this case is a conviction for first-degree murder.”

“I was impressed with the passion that he brought to those closing arguments,” Cohen said.

Waters did not care for what Tim wore — a dress shirt and tie under a brown pullover — to Wednesday’s hearing.

“Here is a man who, by the way, if you notice what he’s wearing in court, he’s not even wearing a coat and tie,” he said. “He’s wearing something dark, and it says exactly what it needs to say about him. He’s dark. He’s definitely guilty. He’s not even trying to show … he’s trying to lighten. None of that. He’s not what he ought to be, because he can’t be what he ought to be.”

Rowlands thought Bliefnick was dressed as if he could “scale up somebody’s wall and break into their home with a crowbar.”

Cohen said a jury looks at body language, facial expressions and facial hair.

 “If ever he is a perfect defendant from Hollywood, yes, I would cast him as the defendant’s defendant,” he said.

Cohen said defense attorneys typically want to present an image of their client contrary to the image being presented by the prosecution.

“The fact he’s wearing the clothing that he’s wearing does not bode well in terms of the presentation,” Cohen said. “Now the defense attorney, I’m a little struck by the fact that she’s got tattoos on both their arms, and she’s exposing the tattoos. My experience has been that when you have a defendant that’s covered up with tattoos, they do everything they can do, unless they’re on the face or the neck or the hands, to cover those things up. You don’t want those things being an impression upon the jury in a negative way. 

“I’m sorry, even in the world we live in now, I don’t think it bodes well. It’s not a good presentation. You can’t make a second first impression. The fact she’s allowing her tattoos to be exposed in the middle of her closing argument is just a distraction for the jury.”

After the verdict, Jones, who had just won the case, took issue with the statements made by the CourtTV panelists and social media against his opponent, Schnack.

Miss Clipping Out Stories to Save for Later?

Click the Purchase Story button below to order a print of this story. We will print it for you on matte photo paper to keep forever.

Current Weather


Trending Stories