because the judge says one of them is not qualified to speak to that issue.Why?
If it comes to it I can't wait for the appeal where conviction is overturned and the judge is reprimanded with consequences. UnbelievableSo how can the judge sustain an objection from the prosecution about testimony of a physical altercation…… when the ‘revised or updated’ IIRC medical examiner report says that the injuries were not the result of a ‘fight’ or words to that effect? MOO
She was only in charge of the actual hospital unit. Strange that a journalist should see fit to publish this ..????
Medical Care At Corcoran State Prison Receives Poor Rating From State Watchdog
Medical care at California State Prison, Corcoran received a poor rating in a recently published state watchdog review. Now, prison advocates worry that…www.kvpr.org
facepalmbecause the judge says one of them is not qualified to speak to that issue.
Probably stunned to actually hear from a true expert.
true - butLight snow up until around 7am. All the heavy stuff started after JOK was found. IMO
Weather in January 2022 in Canton, Massachusetts, USA
Weather reports from January 2022 in Canton, Massachusetts, USA with highs and lowswww.timeanddate.com
That’ll come from the experts hired by the FBI and DOJ. Honestly, even better bc neither of those guys are being paid by the defense.Does the defense have at least 1 expert witness who will be allowed to testify that the injuries weren't from a car?
Yes….. and IIRC the latest / most recent CW theory of the case was a glancing or ‘sideswipe’ strike to the arm of the victim? That sent him careening and jettisoned some many feet IIRC? And yet the testimony of last CW expert has no statements or position about the nature of injuries to the victim’s arm? Is that correct? SMH. MOOA hit by a car that results in no broken bones. Sure.
A hit by a car that results in no broken bones and no bruising but also causes those kind of head injuries. That's harder to believe.
Especially, if you recall, the commonwealth's theory of the collision is that his arm bore the full brunt of the weight of the SUV backing into him. Yet the only sign of the impact was those scratches.
And one that makes sense and has good qualiications. No need for notes whilst her excellent credentials are established, shows confidence in the witness jmoProbably stunned to actually hear from a true expert.
Very sure I have an accurate description of the snowfall and weather thanks to lally's repeated, never ending focus on the weather throughout this trial.true - but
1) we can see what snow was there at 6am and have undisputed testimony he was "covered." to me that doesn't mean no part of his body was potentially visible... but you know... he was pretty covered. things are usually shades of grey.
2) we can convert the precipitation data to approx. inches of snow.
3) a body doesn't need to be buried or completely covered in snow to be obscured to some degree. if you have the stomach, go check out Ukraine war footage for endless examples.