No Connection. Adding "Prior to the Murders?" Inferences?
If def atty had said ---"no connection prior to the murders" seems that is wide open to a reader interp'ing/imagining these inferences.
"BK had no connection prior to murders, at which time he was inside the 1122 King dwelling where..."
From there reader may logically continue by interp'ing/imagining ---
"where BK WATCHED as known-to-him/unknown to him person/persons caused the deaths of the four people."
Or ---
"where BK AIDED/abetted/assisted/continued to act in furtherance of his conspiracy to murder w __."
Or ---
Worse than any of the above ---
"where BK willfully, deliberately and after premeditation, KILLED four people."
Not seeing that adding ^ phrase as helpful to def't, IDK ICBW,
Maybe my imagination was going wild?
snipped for focus @BeginnerSleuther Def atty said "no connection.".... AT should have probably said "no connection prior to the murders" but honestly, this "DNA is a connection" response online was unexpected by me. IMO, she's referring to prior to the murders as the document was making the point that they don't know the prosecution's case. JMO
If def atty had said ---"no connection prior to the murders" seems that is wide open to a reader interp'ing/imagining these inferences.
"BK had no connection prior to murders, at which time he was inside the 1122 King dwelling where..."
From there reader may logically continue by interp'ing/imagining ---
"where BK WATCHED as known-to-him/unknown to him person/persons caused the deaths of the four people."
Or ---
"where BK AIDED/abetted/assisted/continued to act in furtherance of his conspiracy to murder w __."
Or ---
Worse than any of the above ---
"where BK willfully, deliberately and after premeditation, KILLED four people."
Not seeing that adding ^ phrase as helpful to def't, IDK ICBW,
Maybe my imagination was going wild?
Last edited: