2011.07.01 TRIAL Day Thirty-three (Afternoon Session)

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
sidebar is already open.. but doors will close here for the break! you guys rocked today!!!!! thanks so much!
 
JB needs to stop. It is not helping his client by having this witness keep talking about skeletal remains. It reminds the jury of how long she was left in the swamp/dump.

IMO
 
For as much as he has been schooled during this trial, JB should have a few PHDs under his belt by now.
 
Mybe JA could just let him answer why he didn't review them. I am sure there was a reason he didn't need to. imo and I may not know what I'm talking about, but there are too many SA objections, imo.
 
Will they put Cindy on the stand to discuss her "testimony"?
 
Less than an hour left of the state's witnesses!
 
1puidz.jpg

1znbmhg.jpg

I wonder if her friends recognize this eyelash touching crap - if she's always done it or if it's new for the trial.
 
the attys and the judge seem a little cranky this afternoon! I think I would be too at this point, it has been a long go of it. IMO.
 
you can tell by watching JB’s actions during sidebar that he does not respect the judge and the court

I am laying money on the fact that JB is gonna learn some respect for HHJP and the Court during contempt proceedings.
 
Three witnesses left, less than an hour. Wow... :)
 
HHJP asks how many more witnesses the state has

LDB says she has 3 will take less than an hour

HHJP ok
 
in very essential elements of this trial.

On another note, Did anyone catch how CM wouldn't give JB the time of day when he tried to look for questions that wouldn't be objected to?




This cross begs the question: Has Baez ever actually seen a skull?

Does he not realize that one can peer into a skull through the eye sockets, the nose/ nasal cavity, and the little hole at the bottom of the skull, where the spinal column used to be?

Seriously.
 
I'm confused. What does the defense imply could have been found if the skull had been opened???

Dr. Spitz said there was a discoloration that could be consistent with either drowning or suffocation I believe. Someone feel free to correct me.
 
IMHO, pleading for a child's life differs completely from lying to obstruct justice.

CA could have parental love for ICA and still hold her accountable. CA has to think about her responsibility to the larger world, not just ICA. CA has responsibility as a citizen, as well as a parent.

It's not as if CA is protecting ICA as an innocent victim from an assailant, such as someone lying to the Nazis to protect a Jew during the Holocaust.

I know CA is in a horrendous position right now, caught in a crossfire of emotions. But she is making things worse by bending the rules of honest testimony, IMO. :coffeews:

:goodpost::cheer:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
169
Guests online
2,510
Total visitors
2,679

Forum statistics

Threads
603,757
Messages
18,162,454
Members
231,841
Latest member
Placebo
Back
Top