AZlawyer
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 7,883
- Reaction score
- 2,122
From what AZL answered in other places, the judge could deem this the first part of her allocution. If so, she would remind the jury that none of what she said those two days can be considered to be under oath and could restrict her to not repeating anything she already covered in that part when she continues with the rest of her allocution.
I don't think she could say it wasn't under oath, because it was. But she could say you may consider the fact that it was not subject to cross-examination--and then JM could comment in closing about all the great cross-examination he would have done lol.