Let's look at what the defense brought forward.
Suzanne's affair
That there's partial DNA matches to 3 people who aren't Barry.
There's DNA that's not from Barry on the seat and handlebars of Suzanne's bike.
Barry is unable to move through walls.
Suzanne touched the cords to the security cameras in her own home.
When Suzanne texted that she was done, it could be she was done with her coffee.
Barry cooperated when allowed into the home to gather scent items from Suzanne's closet.
Barry know where the Baggies are.
A lot of noise.
Little else.
Where have we heard it said -- if you have no case, attack the victim, attack the evidence (or evidence collection).
Make a lot of noise, with puffery, to seem bigger than you are.
I'm not fooled.
I wanted a ruling today but I can wait.
The Judge needs to defend his ruling. To make it appealproof. The stakes are high in every court case but M1 cases are dire. If we sense some deference to the defense, I suspect it's for that reason -- to make certain that the defense is rightly and fully heard.
IMO the delay favors the prosecution.
IMO if the Judge felt there wasn't enough evidence to move toward trial, would he need to itemize why he feels the prosecution didn't meet the burden? I think no. That's tbe prosecution's problem. I think we'd have had a fast ruling and a "sorry, tty again."
Nope, he's taking time.
If he is going to bind someone over for trial, to remain incarcerated, toward a trial that may well leave him incarcerated for life, the Judge ought to spell out how he arrived at that decision. It's what is best about our system of justice.
And it gives the inmate another month to enjoy his surroundings.
I'm good with that.
JMO JMO JMO JMO