Emi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2012
- Messages
- 10,616
- Reaction score
- 48,824
Since the death penalty is off the table, why did JA remain on the case? It seems like a waste of taxpayers' money.If he becomes indigent, the court would have to appoint a death penalty-qualified attorney. That's how JA ended on the case. LV was deemed indigent.
ETA- I can't remember but I think it requires TWO DP qualified (Both JA & JT are)
Yup, and the defense will say they tailored their defense to what the indictment said, even if they didn't.
Gigi is the only tweeter who understands the law and she is posting lots of stuff about what is going on in court right now. Can't link her though.
Can you imagine resting your case on crimes like these with that last snoozer of a witness?
It's still her right to be provided counsel. He's a public defender, it just happens to be one that is death penalty qualified. Plus, can you imagine delaying it further as a new attorney would need time to catch up. He already stated getting the DP thrown out was a big deal to get done for a client.Since the death penalty is off the table, why did JA remain on the case? It seems like a waste of taxpayers' money.
Why would the defense rest without presenting witnesses?Sounds like the defense may choose to rest w/o presenting witness testimony?
I thought they already said she wasn't going to testify?
That was given to Nate and Justin from "a source"
Why would the defense rest without presenting witnesses?