I saw that. Was the video ever used to positively identify anyone though? Or just coupled with testimony as to who was who?
There are so many things wrong with his statement. But also some things that say (scratching head)..."yea, what about that?"
I agree that it is so strange that Hugh Wiggins was given immunity and did not testify in Jr.'s trial. And why give him immunity since he seemed to be up to his eyeballs in this, unless he is testifying to bigger and more serious stuff, beyond just the murders???
But Jr.'s arguments were strange also... 'My bio dad's ex wife heard me talking about a *different* home invasion/robbery...not THAT one! See?''My friends that I hung out with and tried to recruit were really a bunch of unreliable scumbags that can't be believed and that's why I hung out with them ...oh, ooops ...'
Coldiron, who didn't have much to gain, put Jr as the shooter at the crime.
(Besides the 2 men that testified at Jr.'s trial.)
LPG Jr. never does come out and say "I wasn't there. I wasn't involved." Does he? He just seems to say that the state does not prove it's case sufficiently so therefore he is not guilty.
There was a lot of up front publicity but I do believe that people can see past that when in the jury box. I watched the trial and it seemed pretty convincing.
Yet, I did end watching the trial with many more questions that usually began with "What about ...??" "Why did we never hear about ..."Something unsettling about how quick and how limited the testimony was.
Maybe it was just the prosecution's strategy that we have enough to convict without getting into all the fine details?? I don't know.
All a sad and strange tale.