Oh so they were inept and foolish on purpose so the judge they've been trashing and hounding for months and months, all the way to the SCOIN, could stay because that was really their intention? To what purpose did they maybe do this clever thing? To influence the public and therefor prospective jurors? And that kind of unethical skulduggery seems clever? Ya got my head spinning on this one...I just don't see it. I think is was probably just a lack of legal intelligence, plain and simple. I wonder who actual wrote those redundant briefs and who thought it was a good idea? Maybe the zealous pro bono people were the ones that messed up? But then again AB & BR, the buck stops with them doesn't it? Just some thoughts.