Rallihanna
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 813
- Reaction score
- 2
So what are everyone's guesses as to what their attorney's motion is?
So what are everyone's guesses as to what their attorney's motion is?
I am thinking the same Kimster.....just the fact that JB used the words "could have".....made up by JB....not something ICA stated as a fact for the DT.....of course this is just MO....I have no clue as to the law.....My wildest guess is that it has something to do with the defense accusing GA of abusing KC? Since there isn't any evidence to support that?
But I'm not sure they can file such a motion. That's a question I'd like to ask Mr. Hornsby on tomorrow's radio show.
Could it be something to do with ga grand jury testimony? I think jb is trying to get ga for perjury.
I am thinking the same Kimster.....just the fact that JB used the words "could have".....made up by JB....not something ICA stated as a fact for the DT.....of course this is just MO....I have no clue as to the law.....
Could it be something to do with ga grand jury testimony? I think jb is trying to get ga for perjury.
did HCJP reside over the grand jury?
But isn't it diff when he used the words "could have"......instead of stating it a fact? He is saying maybe this happend....not this "did" happen.....IMO if he stated that it "did" happen, this could be something that his client told him happened......seems to me like he is making this stuff up......The attorneys on HLN have been saying that JB can accuse anyone of anything during opening statements if it helps his client's case. They said attorneys are given wide latitude and are not liable for what is said in court.
But isn't it diff when he used the words "could have"......instead of stating it a fact? He is saying maybe this happend....not this "did" happen.....IMO if he stated that it "did" happen, this could be something that his client told him happened......seems to me like he is making this stuff up......
kwim? am I making any sense here?
HCJP did say he was going to read over the Grand Jury docs this weekend....I'm assuming the motion must be related.
My wildest guess is that it has something to do with the defense accusing GA of abusing KC? Since there isn't any evidence to support that?
But I'm not sure they can file such a motion. That's a question I'd like to ask Mr. Hornsby on tomorrow's radio show.
But isn't it diff when he used the words "could have"......instead of stating it a fact? He is saying maybe this happend....not this "did" happen.....IMO if he stated that it "did" happen, this could be something that his client told him happened......seems to me like he is making this stuff up......
kwim? am I making any sense here?
I don't recall him saying that GA "could have" put his p**** in ICa's mouth - it sounded to me like he was stating that as a fact ....?