Vern
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2017
- Messages
- 2,673
- Reaction score
- 26,167
IMO, I highly doubt RA will be convicted solely on the PCA and absolutely no one has suggested or inferred that he would be. The confessions (which are not even part of the PCA - they came later) will also go towards that IMO as the Judge has already ruled that they will be allowed into the trial. As will a bunch other evidence that we don't even know that we don't know yet IMO.
I am biased (I can even admit that) - I will always weigh sworn testimony higher than any what-ifs and suppositions given in denied motions. Being unbiased means that one considers and questions and weighs both sides of the equation and their evidence, not merely one side (doesn't seem to be happening at all in this thread). I have concerns that the trial will not be open to the public just as many have, yet I have no concerns with weighing sworn testimony given under oath from the three day hearings that largely debunked the allegations from the FMs.
Especially so when the Defence's own witnesses from LE testified that they investigated SODDIs yet could not place them at the scene at the time of the murders, that they themselves found a sister of one of them to not be credible, that they could not come up with probable cause to execute a search warrant on any of them because they were simply unable to link any of them to the crime. That at least one of them had their words taken out of context by the Defence in the FM. That Dr. Wala herself testified that she thought RA may have been malingering.
We haven't yet seen the vast majority of the State's evidence. That is what trials are for. That should be obvious.
I won't link the MS 3 day hearings (one of the sources for the above testimony that has been linked in here often) as many choose not to listen to anything they put out about this case <modsnip: Please don't reference non approved sources> This is not coming from just the MS.
No, IMO RA will not be convicted on the PCA; there will plenty of evidence presented at trial that will be heard, seen and weighed by the jurors who will be present at trial and whom will decide RA's guilt or innocence and, if required, his eventual fate.
Justice for Abby & Libby. It's their time.
I am biased (I can even admit that) - I will always weigh sworn testimony higher than any what-ifs and suppositions given in denied motions. Being unbiased means that one considers and questions and weighs both sides of the equation and their evidence, not merely one side (doesn't seem to be happening at all in this thread). I have concerns that the trial will not be open to the public just as many have, yet I have no concerns with weighing sworn testimony given under oath from the three day hearings that largely debunked the allegations from the FMs.
Especially so when the Defence's own witnesses from LE testified that they investigated SODDIs yet could not place them at the scene at the time of the murders, that they themselves found a sister of one of them to not be credible, that they could not come up with probable cause to execute a search warrant on any of them because they were simply unable to link any of them to the crime. That at least one of them had their words taken out of context by the Defence in the FM. That Dr. Wala herself testified that she thought RA may have been malingering.
We haven't yet seen the vast majority of the State's evidence. That is what trials are for. That should be obvious.
I won't link the MS 3 day hearings (one of the sources for the above testimony that has been linked in here often) as many choose not to listen to anything they put out about this case <modsnip: Please don't reference non approved sources> This is not coming from just the MS.
No, IMO RA will not be convicted on the PCA; there will plenty of evidence presented at trial that will be heard, seen and weighed by the jurors who will be present at trial and whom will decide RA's guilt or innocence and, if required, his eventual fate.
Justice for Abby & Libby. It's their time.
Last edited by a moderator: