ObfuscationI’m not understanding why it’s important to the defense to change the trajectory of shots to their story line. What am I missing?
Probably?Did he just disagree with what Eisenstat testified to?
IDK, it seems what they are getting at is it was a contact wound so the shooter would be covered in blood, matter and possibly be wounded - no probably, giving them their moneys worth. I am not sure that this proves anything, we know there was a hose there and we know there was a change of clothes, although it is not proven exactly when the 3rd change of clothes was. I also don’t know how this fits in with their 5 foot two shooter presentation. None of that was presented as contact wounds. mooI’m not understanding why it’s important to the defense to change the trajectory of shots to their story line. What am I missing?
I don't think they have any way of recognizing them really, sitting in the audience.Wonder if the jury wonders why MMs family isn’t there? It would really bother me if I was a juror.
I have a feeling that they would figure it to mean that MM's family does not support AM. But I agree, it is odd. I can imagine it would be too painful for her family to be there at this point though, what with the autopsy photos and the details of the murders, etc. But I think the jury will see this as meaning that perhaps her family does not support AM.Wonder if the jury wonders why MMs family isn’t there? It would really bother me if I was a juror.
Wonder if the jury wonders why MMs family isn’t there? It would really bother me if I was a juror.
The jury needs to Do the Right Thing here!Completely true. Barton Fink was so good.
I agree.AM looks more like an addict now than he has ever looked in any photos I've seen of him.
I know I've said that I am expecting a medical emergency with AM. Today may be the day - jmo
I don't think they have any way of recognizing them really, sitting in the audience.