not a particularly big fan of wendy murphy, but i did get a kick out of her recent rant when she called out the bug man, claiming that he exemplified for-hire liars and the commonplace tolerance for these type of witnesses. she added that such behavior, including jb's vasco stunt, made a mockery of the judicial system and that it was time for sanctions, sanctions, sanctions.
did the bug man actually lie under oath, on behalf of those that put him on the stand, on behalf of those that paid him for his testimony? heck, i don't know. but imo there does seem to be something a little squirrely going on with some of these pay-to-play witnesses, something not entirely above board, something not entirely in step with the spirit of the judicial system.
for example, take dr. spitz's testimony today during cross examination. did it strike everyone as entirely honest and offered in good faith? at one point ja asked ds if he recently did an interview for a detroit station, and if he went into great detail about the anthony case during said interview, which actually aired just 3 days ago. ds didn't seem to recall if he even did the interview, then he said that he did but that he only discussed logistics, not details about the case.
ja asking him at the 3:00 mark
http://www.wftv.com/video/28281844/index.html 3:00 p6
the very detailed detroit interview:
http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/28239806/index.html
ja also asked ds about the duct tape, specifically how someone might go about wrapping a stretch of tape around the skull, from ear to ear, without disturbing the anatomically accurate positioning of the jaw. ds indignantly replied that the tape wasn't wrapped around the skull, that it was just attached to one side of the skull, that he never saw a photo or knew anything about the tape being wrapped across and around the head.
ja asking ds about the tape, and ds's reply, at the 2:25 mark
http://www.wftv.com/video/28281884/index.html
ds offering a very different opinion about the positioning of the tape during the detroit interview, at the 6:35 mark:
http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/28239806/index.html 6:35
yep, pretty squirrely imo...
did the bug man actually lie under oath, on behalf of those that put him on the stand, on behalf of those that paid him for his testimony? heck, i don't know. but imo there does seem to be something a little squirrely going on with some of these pay-to-play witnesses, something not entirely above board, something not entirely in step with the spirit of the judicial system.
for example, take dr. spitz's testimony today during cross examination. did it strike everyone as entirely honest and offered in good faith? at one point ja asked ds if he recently did an interview for a detroit station, and if he went into great detail about the anthony case during said interview, which actually aired just 3 days ago. ds didn't seem to recall if he even did the interview, then he said that he did but that he only discussed logistics, not details about the case.
ja asking him at the 3:00 mark
http://www.wftv.com/video/28281844/index.html 3:00 p6
the very detailed detroit interview:
http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/28239806/index.html
ja also asked ds about the duct tape, specifically how someone might go about wrapping a stretch of tape around the skull, from ear to ear, without disturbing the anatomically accurate positioning of the jaw. ds indignantly replied that the tape wasn't wrapped around the skull, that it was just attached to one side of the skull, that he never saw a photo or knew anything about the tape being wrapped across and around the head.
ja asking ds about the tape, and ds's reply, at the 2:25 mark
http://www.wftv.com/video/28281884/index.html
ds offering a very different opinion about the positioning of the tape during the detroit interview, at the 6:35 mark:
http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/28239806/index.html 6:35
yep, pretty squirrely imo...