OKay, so the defense did some damage today with one old text. But I think they are misrepresenting what the tweet actually means. So I hope the State can explain and clarify for the jury.
Here is the text:
In a plea deal, Bradley, however, gave authorities full access to his phone, including deleted and otherwise privileged communication with his lawyer. That includes a text that suggests Bradley actually has no idea if, contrary to his repeated testimony here this week, Hernandez shot him in the face in February of 2013.
“Now u sure once I withdraw this lawsuit I wont be held on perjury after I tell the truth about me not recalling anything about who shot me,” Bradley wrote to attorney Robert Pickering.
I disagree with the defenses interpretation of that text.
My interpretation is based upon the CONTEXT of the tweet. Originally AB had said various times that he 'had no idea who shot him.' He told authorities that a few times. BUT IT WAS NOT THE TRUTH. He did not want to tell on AH at first.
So in the above text he is saying ' when he tells the truth about him not knowing who shot him' ---he means he was not telling the truth at first, and NOW he wants to.
But the defense is trying to make it seem like he is saying that he is going to finally tell the truth that he doesn't know who shot him. And that is obviously not so. He does not do that.
He is asking his lawyer, about the consequences of his finally admitting that he DOES know who shot him. I think that can be explained to the jury although it might be hard to do so if the defense keeps muddying the waters.
at first read, that text is jolting and it does seem like he is saying he does not know who shot him. But in context, it is clear that he is saying WHEN he tells the truth about the situation. Which is what he was about to do when he asked his lawyer about any perjury issues since he had lied when he said he had no idea who shot him.
