photographer4
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2014
- Messages
- 4,457
- Reaction score
- 25,616
Well, what I think the State is trying to do actually, is suggest it, and hope that the circumstantial evidence leads jurors to buy their theory that RA was BG. It seems at a glance to make sense really - he was on the bridge. Did he leave before the girls arrived? Depends on which source one believes. Did he follow them out and the rest we know? OR… was some other guy already at the other end, walk out and then double back on the kids and then we know the rest??(RSBBM)
There is no evidence of this. That’s the big issue in this case. The state can’t just say BG=RA, they have to actually prove it.
The ONLY thing that gives me pause is the bullet atm. And I’m not even confident it is HIS. I’m not sure of the “science” they’re relying on to show it couldn’t be anyone else’s - and I haven’t the patience to learn about it at the moment. I am not a juror, so I don’t have to either. I can say I find it sketchy and it be MOO because I’m not deciding some guy’s fate going forward. Jurors won’t have that luxury and I hope the science can be dumbed way down to help them understand it AND believe it, otherwise, this case is in trouble imo.