Vern
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2017
- Messages
- 2,516
- Reaction score
- 24,227
I think it's important that we must remember that the Defence doesn't need to "prove the Odinism" theory in a court of law ... they just need to use it to cast doubt upon the prosecution's case and evidence. They aren't required to prove anything as that is the prosecution's burden.You’re right, it makes very little actual sense. But each person associated with the leaks is said to have been vocally pro-defence my guess would be the photos are perceived to support the Odimism theory in some way. It would make even less sense to intentionally leak photos that damage it. I’m not saying I think it’d be real obvious, using the tree and the F as an example, but it’s usually the case that we see what we want to see.
JMO
The Prosecution will need to prove it's "not true/applicable" if that's what the Defence throws into the arena to cast their "reasonable doubt" into play.