I really don't understand how it's possible for them to try to explain her behavior with a witness who has never once examined or talked to the defendent. ICA's sudden waterworks just make me :maddening:.
They can't do this, right? "Assume a hypothetical that is based completely around our...
I think the jury is still there could be wrong. So sorry, I should have been more clear. The defense is trying to offer her as an "expert", the prosecution is objecting. Barnes and Noble has yet to weigh in. :crazy:
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.