That was FANTASTIC!!!
Emily D BakerWhat other media podcasts or video streaming services have analysis of the day in court that are more objective than the usual choices?
AgreeThat was FANTASTIC!!!
I thought it was a beautiful closing and well done. Waters brought it all together. The cause and effect of AM's financial crimes and deceit was crystal clear. Imo.I'm not sure Waters hit it out of the park with that closing. Seemed kind of weak to me... IMO
Sorry my ADHD is a problem.. lol Earlier in the day I can tune some things out, but all the sudden the last hour it was all I could hear and then I couldn't focus on anything except that either.. lolThanks now I can't NO hear the constant coughing.... LOL
Yes! 100%He's not on trial for the financial stuff - that comes next. But the Prosecutor sure isn't presenting it that way.
Which is why the Prosecutor should have skipped on down. Just put it on a bullet list. They KNOW. They HEARD. Just say PONZI SCHEME CRASHING and spend 3 minutes. Same with the pills. We KNOW. Skip on down.
He needed a consultant who knows how to teach and persuade. Even the best learners cannot handle more than 3-4 main points per day in a contentious or unfamiliar matter. WHY is he talking about Alex's own alibi? We KNOW he was lying. Just reconstruct what happened.
Walk us through what you, Mr Prosecutor, imagine to have been the lead-up (on that day or maybe over a couple of days) to the events of that night. He's just all over the place because, like most public speakers, doing an entire day of lecturing/persuading is mentally exhausting. Looks like the Prosecutor made sketchy bullet points and did not think in terms of overall rhetoric and oratory. HE puts in too many details (it is no longer relevant about dying dad or boat case).
Ever the thief.Did the officers just take a pen from the jacket of AM as they were leaving the court room? Hmmm.... seems like he keeps trying to get away with stuff
Pretty sure the "tangled web we weave" phrase was used by the prosecution in a "tongue in cheek" manner because that is what the defendant's answer was in response to the prosecution asking him about all his lies and why he lied -- AM literally said that: "oh what a tangled web we weave" with a shrug in answer, those were his own "trite" words, which was pretty lame for an attorney to fall back on, IMO, and the prosecution was attempting to make him "eat his own words". ha ha... gulpSat on a jury in the 70's with the prosecutor using the same worn out “tangled web” phrase in the same dramatic way.....ended up a hung jury.
I'm not sure Waters hit it out of the park with that closing. Seemed kind of weak to me... IMO
Imo, three hours isn't long for a 7 week trial.I'm pro-guilt on this one, but that closing felt a little long to me.