~ A Most Ugly Affair! ~
WHAT WERE YOU
THINKING?
Under cross examination from Allan Sodomsky, Roseboro's defense attorney, Funk said Michael Roseboro had never mentioned killing his wife nor shown her any type of weapon.
"Did he talk about taking out any big insurance policies?" Sodomsky asked.
"No," Funk said.
Michael Roseboro’s attorney Allan Sodomsky questioning Angela Funk in Friday’s hearing as reported by the New Era (click here).
Is this the best you could do, Sodomsky? There is only one reason you proceed with a preliminary hearing - to plant doubts in the public’s - and future jury pool’s - minds. That’s it – the bottom line.
Sodomsky succeeded in doing the exact opposite. Michael Roseboro’s mistress, Angela Funk, provided an urgent motive for the killing from the witness stand in these quotes from the same New Era article:
They talked "about the day, how it was a good day, and our future together ... like getting married and all that stuff," Funk testified late this morning. She said she and Michael Roseboro had planned to leave their spouses, and that she worried about his financial situation — specifically losing part of his family's longtime funeral business in Denver.
"One day she could probably take him for a lot if she ever found out about us," Funk recalled telling Michael Roseboro during the phone conversation, between 8:45 and 9 p.m. on July 22.
Roseboro responded that "he didn't want to lose it ... in the divorce if she wanted any part of it," Funk said. She said Michael Roseboro "talked about putting the home in his dad's name so she (Jan Roseboro) couldn't touch it."
The phone conversation is within one hour of Jan Roseboro being killed.
Who are these two people? They meet, have a seven week affair, Roseboro has four children and a 19-year marriage to Jan; Funk has two children and an eight-year marriage to Randy, but they are out looking at wedding dresses and discussing how she will wear her hair for the wedding? Are you kidding me?
A poster on DenverPaOnline.com said this:
I think we all are looking at it from our perspective, what most normal people would do or think. Clearly these two are not normal. It's just scary and sad that they ever bumped into each other. If one of them would have been more on the normality spectrum, maybe things wouldn't have gone where they did.
Well apparently they did know they had some hurtles to face. From a Reading Eagle article there is this from Funks testimony (click here):
"We were talking in the three- to five-year time frame," she said. "We knew we had issues. Like our families, his business, my job, getting divorced.
"He had talked about throwing a 40th birthday party for me and that's about 18 months away."
So, Angela, was it 3-5 years or a year-and-a half or three months or three weeks or the night of the afternoon you had sex and talked about marriage and “all that stuff” and then had a phone conversation with him that same night worrying about his financial future and losing the funeral home - within one hour of Jan Roseboro being killed?
These two are simply unbelievable.
I figured when I heard the preliminary hearing would be held, Sodomsky was going to place the blame on someone else – the oldest Roseboro child, Angela Funk or someone specific Roseboro’s private investigators had found. I thought there would be fireworks.
Well, there were – but not in Sodomsky’s favor. We learned that Funk and Roseboro are “pathological shells” as a poster on DenverPaOnline so concisely nailed it. I wouldn’t trust either one of them with a penny.
From the same Reading Eagle article cited above, Sodomsky is quoted as follows:
"You can't build a case on guesswork, conjecture and suspicion and I can't refute smoke," Sodomsky said. "And that's all the prosecution has."
Is that all you have, Sodomsky? And, yes, you can refute smoke, Sodomsky. You’re a defense attorney. That’s your job. If all they have is smoke then it should be easy.
But the best you can do is to lay this murder off on a random intruder who killed Jan Roseboro for her jewelry and then cleaned up the blood before leaving?
You’ve got to do better than that, Sodomsky. You just gave the prosecution a huge, huge advantage. What the hell were you thinking? Were you hoping to build sympathy for your client and his mistress? Let me be the first to tell you - that certainly did not happen. Talk about having issues!
And what about the baby, Allan?
