If WM had *not* had that several-hours-long phonecall with his new love interest between the time he supposedly killed himself and the time when DM was said to have said those nasty things to him (I am going with DM's own words here, wherein he says the business meeting in the afternoon was the last time he saw his dad, and then he admitted to his gf, the lovely CN, that he had said all of those hateful things to him the last time he talked to him), then it might lend somewhat of a reasonable doubt as to murder vs suicide... the way that it stands, he had just spent hours talking to his newfound interest in life, excitedly making plans for the very immediate future to do something special for her for her birthday in a couple of days. A meeting had just been held wherein everyone seemed to think things went well (except for his son, likely because he didn't get his way in having Mr. Barnes fired). His back was getting better, it seems his drinking hadn't been a problem really, since before he had been laid up with this back issues, and things were just ready to roll with his MRO, which he was proud of accomplishing.
Thankfully the judge is more cognizant than jurors as to the importance of circumstantial evidence, and that it is not a lesser type of evidence than direct evidence. Seems that DM has a pile of those little circumstances all adding up, even contributed to by his own words during his witness statement. Whether the reconstructionist's testimony is ruled out or not, it is obvious from just trying it out physically oneself, that it is an awkward position, which, why would one do it that way, when a much simpler way to position oneself and the gun easily exists. If we keep in mind that the judge is to have no knowledge (is that true??) of DM's previous convictions, and she is to judge without any bias, prejudice or emotion, I'm not sure how it'll all turn out. Are we taking bets? jmo
Thankfully the judge is more cognizant than jurors as to the importance of circumstantial evidence, and that it is not a lesser type of evidence than direct evidence. Seems that DM has a pile of those little circumstances all adding up, even contributed to by his own words during his witness statement. Whether the reconstructionist's testimony is ruled out or not, it is obvious from just trying it out physically oneself, that it is an awkward position, which, why would one do it that way, when a much simpler way to position oneself and the gun easily exists. If we keep in mind that the judge is to have no knowledge (is that true??) of DM's previous convictions, and she is to judge without any bias, prejudice or emotion, I'm not sure how it'll all turn out. Are we taking bets? jmo