m00c0w
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Messages
- 3,523
- Reaction score
- 7,581
Because they know you should never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to. Going with RL, for instance, there may be exculpatory evidence the defense was not privy to. If they specifically say outright that BH or PW committed the murder, they may actually be able to stand up to scrutiny if the prosecution has exculpatory information buried in the discovery somewhere. It’s much, much better to have a faceless individual or group of people whose alibis can’t be disproven. Mention a few people that might belong to such a group, but never actually state those people committed the murder. Just that they or someone in their group likely did it, and you’re covered.So my question for the masses as I don’t understand the logic behind it.
Why did the Defense go with Odinism when we know they don’t even believe it according to the latest podcasts. Why wouldn’t they go with a RL or somebody like KAK?
I still believe that would go over a lot better with a jury than a cult. Mooo
The main issue is they chose an insane theory to hitch their wagon to.
JMO