Just got to the end of 33 pages, whoo.
It was frustrating to listen to that today, but I was very pleased to see Justice Heeney warn the jury just prior that a suggestion from the lawyer does not make it so.
If the jury strips away the what-ifs and relies on the new and / or corroborating information that the defence provided, well, they could fit it on the head of a pin. The defence may not be obliged to provide evidence showing innocence, but if they could provide any independent testimony from witnesses that would clearly contradict any of the crown evidence, that'd be good.
For example, "My client was with his girlfriend, Stacey, on the night of the crime." Then calls Stacey to the stand, and she swears under oath, "He was with me on the night of the crime." Ta da! There was none of that.
As to their one witness, I said it before and will say it again, TLM could have just walked in the front door and out again to keep moving and avoid making contact with any of the many parents that I'm sure were standing around. It was not an 'aha' moment for me.
I'm looking forward to tomorrow - does anyone know - can the lawyers use a presentation while they're making arguments? Defence really didn't have anything, but the Crown has a lot of images that could have a big impact. Can they run a Power Point summarizing their evidence concurrently, or is it just an old-school speech? TIA.