Sometimes I have mix feelings. They haven't an easy job. Their client is a nightmare as client because the things that he said, confessions, etc. Everytime he talks, he made his defense more difficult. How can you defend that? You can appoint the bad investigation at the beggining but this maybe isn't enough (depending of the evidence and what their client said). They can talk to him, hear what he wants and explain it can be better to change his plea, or like they are doing - try to taint the jury pool or prepare for an appeal.
Honestly, I didn't like the fact that the voicemail of Baldwin was made public - he was just trying to do his job which is a difficult job. But confirmed my suspicions they weren't ready for the trial a month before it.
But then they file absolute ridiculous motions with some valid points and then absolute ridiculous points that outshine the rest and they lose the rest of my little sympathy. Like the ding dong thing. If Judge Gull had playfull called them ding dong, they would call her biased, awful,disrespectful, file a motion for her to remove what she called them, etc. They show absolute disrespect for the court, the judge, the prosecution, their professions, the families, to their client, etc. I felt second hand embarassment reading that.
For me, it's indifferent which judge will preside the trial. I think any other judge wouldn't be half patient as Judge Gull has been. Any other Judge would have held Rozzi in contempt when he was screaming at the judge she didn't know anything about the case.
My bet is this trial will not occur in October. The defese will try to stall at maximum.
