Search results for query: *

There were depositions. Under oath. The court has the depositions. So lying about what somebody said in a deposition doesn't make any sense. Judge just has to read through the deposition or look at the page given in the footnote. The lawyers would probably get in a lot of trouble as well if they...

The court has the deposition, so making things up that aren't in there and were never said wouldn't make any sense.

They didn't make this up, they have receipts. I don't get how people can't see the difference between when they say things that they actually have receipts for and that they would get in big trouble for if they lied and things that are their speculation and conclusions (meaning - opinions) from...

It's in the 136 pages defense memo, I can't remember right now who (Holeman?) said this in a deposition.

Ok, I'll explain it again. On Sept 6 the prosecutor told the defense they still couldn't find the Prof. and might not be able to ever identify him. WHILE AT THE SAME TIME Holeman already knew who the Prof. was and was in the process of setting up an interview with him. So "we couldn't find him...

Of course LE has to keep everything and keep all notes (these days with computers, it's also easy to find what you are looking for), if they didn't do that, if it ever comes to a trial and things are missing, that's a problem. If important things are missing, you can't even bring it to trial...

I can't access the article (probably because Europe), I read the actual filing, but yes, that's what it says and yes, Holeman interviewed the Professor recently (would have to look for the exact date again, too tired right now, but it was in September, the 23rd maybe?) after they found him out...

Well, they couldn't find the Professor until a couple of days ago - and see the posts above, after the memo that mentioned the "missing" Professor, they all of a sudden remembered his name, found him and interviewed him again and he pretty much said the opposite of what they claim he said back...

Of course they were hiding him, the even claimed it would be impossible to find him and nobody has any idea who he is. In the new filing today defense says they got an email on September 6 from the prosecutor who said that they still haven't found him even with contacting the FBI and the...

Not sure what you are trying to say? In the defense memo it said that LE doesn't remember and likely won't be able to find that Professor - ever. And just after that memo, they suddenly remember and interview him. And he says pretty much the opposite of what LE claimed before (that it had...

If I just found the right one, and I probably did (and I'm probably not allowed to say where I found it or link to it, so I let somebody do that who understands the rules better than I do), they miraculously found the Professor shortly after the Frank's motion memo mentioning him and how nobody...

The "brother" and a "gang"! Defense memo page 71: Who is EF, this man that was mimicking BH’s Facebook posts from 126 miles away? You will soon learn that he is a man that has admitted to both of his sisters that he was involved in the murders; a man that told his sister that because of his...

Yeah, that's what I don't get. It's just because the defense said it. It's the defense's duty to defend their client, that's part of a fair trial. If we don't accept that, we could just prosecute people without defense and call it a day. Two things can be true at the same time, the defense blows...

Defense memo page 43 and 44: At his August 8, 2023, deposition, Sheriff Liggett was adamant that one person, and one person alone – Richard Allen – was involved in the murder of Abby and Libby.34 However, off record Liggett doesn’t believe that one man was capable of pulling off all of those...

Again, what I am talking about is that they can't lie if there are receipts. If somebody says something in a deposition and they quote that or say that they lied, this has to be true for the simple fact that there are receipts. Being caught lying to the court about what someone said in a...

But there is the guy who knew about the "antlers" years ago. How is that possible?

@EOA It's all such a huge mess, I don't know how this is even possible ... I wonder if the prosecution will be able to ever prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt, no matter who ends up in court, maybe RA, but maybe also other people. It just shows that the prosecution's case is just as good...

This it not about what should be thrown out or what shouldn't be (I know the memo is, but I mean my opinion), if you have some LE lie in a deposition, that's a problem. If you have someone with a false alibi for that day, that's a problem too. And yes, you need an open mind for that, the people...

But that was my point from the beginning, I want the right person or people behind bars, that's the justice that Libby and Abby deserve. And it's important to get the right person or people off the streets, they are a danger to society. It helps no one if, just to get someone convicted, the...

You have to seperate it and you can. Because things like quotes from depositions, that are recorded and in writing (receipts) still happened, cult theory or not. And if people (LE) contradict each other, meaning, one must be lying, that's interesting and makes you wonder why and makes you wonder...