Oh yes, I can just picture the framers of the constitution applauding JB from their graves for his use of lies and deception in order to free a child killer. Yeah, they were probably highly amused at his ignorance of procedure and his comical handling of witnesses not to mention attempts to avoid discovery issues with his supposed 'experts'. As for the most disgusting accusations against a grieving family member without a bit of evidence to support them? A real knee slapper, I'll bet.
All due respect, but IMO, it's you who may not understand the constitution or the duties of the defense to the law. The judicial system was formed to be a search for truth, not a win at all cost. They are supposed to respect the law, the courts and their profession while offering an honest defense against the state's charges. What it's morphed into during the last 25 years of televised trials and a few fame *advertiser censored* lawyers is another matter, but what was originally intended was truth and justice and that is still what we should always hope for from our court system - not look away, or give kudos to someone just because he "won". JB was and is an embarrassment to his profession and his "win" was simply luck at getting such an ignorant & inept jury - he only fooled those 12 and an extremely small minority of the public. He may have gotten away with this trial unscathed by official censure, but he is a laughing stock in the legal community and always will be.
