This was discussed a bit on the last thread. Do you have an opinion on if a PA actually telling lies, as in untruths (only JO dna on shirt for eg), in a closing argument would be a ground for appeal in and of itself? The other question was could Lally receive the consequences he deserves for this unethical conduct through a bar complaint or some other civil body? Any chance of criminal charges for the equivalent of perjury by the PA with the intent of misleading a jury? Seems to me the system must hold PAs to high' standards of professional conduct and Lally has totally missed the bar with his conduct jmo. And I'm sure if I had the time I could find other examples that fit the bill throughout the trial.jmoSame! He changed so many facts during closing from what he presented as testimony during the trial and that’s unforgivable. Especially when there is no transcript for the jury to look back on, which he knew would be the case. Two of the bigger ones were the time she allegedly hit him and when she was seen outside 34 Fairview, which in his opening was 1245 but that was debunked by her arriving back to JOK home at 1236, and the other huge one was him saying the only DNA found on JOK clothing was his own and that’s simply not true. The testimony indicated 2 others’ DNA found. There were a multitude of other things he changed too.
To semi quote a line from Pulp Fiction, Lally actually lying in his closing is "...pretty far from being ok..." (Marcellus).
Eta the word damn in last line to align correcty with quote
eta x2 removed the above as not right after all
Last edited: