Wait...I missed that! Did LDB say that yesterday? Wow
Oh you know what..I got kicked off line a few times yesterday. I better get to watching the whole thing over again, I actually forgot about that.
:cow:
That didn't happen yesterday (that I know of) - I believe it happened some time ago. I vividly remember LDB saying that and it was broadcasting live on the net and tv. Court tv had it on live and bleeped it out in the replay (I don't remember if it went out over the air initially). Yesterday was spent waiting on sidebars, in camera, and JB to spit out his words in some sort of comprehensible fashion.
Here are some highlights from yesterday which can be found at the link below:
the 2011.04.15 Hearing thread
Oh No that was not just said . . . . . . . . .
List from 4/15/11 hearing (first 16 pages)
Ynot post #47: JA: defendant is like a piece of evidence and both sides should have right to examine her.
Softtail post #76: JB - Give me a moment so I can collect my thoughts.
Intermezzo post #91: JBP' "Mr Baaaaaaez I've read the depositions...what are they testifying to?"
Baez"ahhh, ummm, well judge..I think...
Wenwe4 post #96: (if I may quote myself)
HHBP - what MH diagnosis will these experts testify to? Look @ the reports - PTSD? is that what they will testify to?
JB - wants a moment to collect thots - situation here is because a MH defense is not being asserted and defendant has not been diagnosed as such with having some mental defect. there are aspects of behavioral science - whether that comes up with a label - sound psychological expertise
HHBP - what will they testify to
JB - they will testify to the alternative to the consciousness of guilt - multiple reasons this could be used to assert or tell the jury - this is all to rebut a specific thing that may or may not be introduced. it goes to situation of consciousness of guilt - it should be outlined - we would like to offer that it does not and cannot provide an answer to the jurors.
HHBP - what is it the experts will testify to?
Chiquita71 post #101: HHJP: so what exception under the hearsay law is this admissable? they are going to read reports that somebody else said. they have not been cross examined. so what exception? what I am trying to do is avoid sending the jury in and out like a pop tart. HHJP (imo)
Ynot post #359: The stain could have been a banana. The sticker could have been a leaf. KC could have been a loving mother.
Chiquita71 post #361: JB: there is no evidence of residue. residue is open to interpretation. she saw it one moment and in another it disappeared. she doesn't know what it was. YM mistakenly or errounously he wrote it down as...
JP: did you take her depo, what did she say?
JB: it was something in the shape of a heart.
Wenwe4 post #375: HHBP - can I see the evidence please? You are referring to stickers maked identification A&B anything else?
JB - there was no size -no photograph of this mentioned - the only person who might be able to testify to this was a lab person and perhaps another lab person - if you look they have writing on them. i think this whole thing is an attempt to link it to ms. anthony - i don't know if it's some psychological love gesture . . . no one knows what it was . . . . it would be a gross error to include this
Eidetic post #392: JB: "That is a photograph that shows my client... (HJBP: "And the child?") ...and the child... at Ricardo Moralez apartment."
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133435&page=16