IMO AT and Sy Ray deserve every bit ofJudge H’s ire and tongue lashing r/t SR’s inflammatory and accusatory language in his Affidavit.
Judge at one point referred to SR’s “conspiracy theories” based on no evidence and leaving the AT&T seven day timeline for receiving Timing Advance records out of his Affadavit.
Called SR out/scolded him and AT about leaving that info out and mentioned their serious allegations/ implying the state is hiding evidence which could lead to serious consequences for state officers of the court, not least of which disbarment.
Judge said he sees no facts or evidence that the TA reports can be obtained another way per SR/AT’s claims, and said he’d only allow it if facts and evidence are presented to back up said claims and if I heard him correctly, he’d allow AT questioning on it without the jury present. Did I hear that right?
Just wondering why bother if the Jury can’t hear about alleged evidence SR supposedly has about other ways to obtain BK’s TA reports.
I’m having trouble understanding if SR provides facts/evidence to back up his claims and Attorney’s can only question SR and other witnesses about it without the Jury present, the Jury won’t hear about it and so won’t be considering it in their deliberations, so why bother with it at all?? Isn’t it considered inadmissible evidence if the Jury can’t hear about it??
Wondering if it’s because the D will be able to mention it in opening or closing statements which aren’t considered evidence? Idk. IANAL and my head’s been spinning on that one but perhaps I heard the Judge wrong r/t AT questioning SR/other witnesses without the Jury present.
I did have to turn my volume up several times throughout this hearing in order to hear the Judge. IMO he’s soft spoken and tends to not speak into microphone lol, I love this Judge though!
Way to smack ‘em down Judge H, huge virtual thumbs up!
IMHOO
