CathyR
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 398
- Reaction score
- 9
The blood spatter evidence is unassailable. Too much of it points to her hands wielding the knife, tipping over the vacuum cleaner, etc.
Her story is in conflict with the facts in every single detail. Even an Appellate Court agreed with this.
Those kind of previous rulings, before the laws changed, is what got people held in prison for too many years when evidence was not allowed. The bite in the apple was only once and is always upheld no news there. Due to the finicky choice of prosecutors and lawyers to to test what they deem plausible at the time, defendants have been set free later. DNA and cases where not all relevant information was handled over. IS why?