Garlandy
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 425
- Reaction score
- 0
Improper argument, among others.
The presumption of innocence belongs to the defendant, especially an UNCHARGED defendant.
Access is not a crime. Awareness of angry messages is not a crime. Murder is not burglary. None of the stolen items cited were found in the defendant's possession nor linked to her. Refusing to steal cash is not a crime, and no proof was offered that the defendant intentionally determined to leave it.
Calling her a burglar and stating without qualification that she had committed a burglary was unproven and without foundation.
Not only was the defendant not conclusively linked to the burglary, she wasn't even charged with the crime.
So Defense counsel effectively stipulates by default that their client stole the alleged murder weapon?
No way.
I maintain that a deal was cut.
I believe the factor here is once JA started murdering Travis.. logically she is not welcome in his home any more - thus making it a burglary. It has nothing to do with theft.