RealityMan
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2013
- Messages
- 343
- Reaction score
- 0
When comparing the 'could be' against 'likely was', it's a given that people with bullets to the brain aren't capable of functioning.
To say that "people with bullets to the brain aren't capable of functioning" is not a true statement and is irrelevant to the ME's testimony and report regarding the particular wound sustained by TA in this case.
In reaching your conclusion that it is more likely that JA stabbed TA first, you are ignoring significant evidence to the contrary.
It is perfectly reasonable for a person to conclude, given all of the evidence, that it is more likely that JA shot TA first. I think the prosecution should adapt to this fact and not rely on establishing that the stabbing must have occurred first. Otherwise, the jury may start to have questions about the prosecution's case.