Thanks. That's true it makes Brent the victim, but if Brian says otherwise, how are they going to prove otherwise? It's reasonable doubt. I guess they have DMs account of the suspect with Brian's body type. Plus they have Brian's DNA on the sheath.
OK so just because BK “says” this is what happened doesn’t mean it’s going to make it into the trial for the jury to even consider as reasonable doubt (see below for explanation). By the way, this applys to any alternative perpetrator(s) the D name and good luck to them whether/if they name the deceased veteran BK, or any other person the combined LE task force has already examined and cleared/ruled out.
At any rate, the fact is per Judge Hippler’s order, AT must provide something more substantive than ‘my client says this is what happened’ and baseless allegations against an alternative perp to the court by this Friday, May 23rd. And be prepared to argue for its admissibility before the court/Judge at a hearing set in early June. Judge Hippler will then enter his ruling on it aka decides if it will be allowed in as admissible evidence for trial.
If Judge H rules as admissible, imo BK will have to take the stand to explain what happened which opens him up to cross examination by the state and oh my geeee or as we say around here in New England, woahhhh Nellie!!, I’d love a front row seat to see that!
Further, AT can claim she got the lead/tip from the state’s discovery but I’d also imagine she’d have been told early on by her client ‘this is what happened’ and so why has she waited over 2 years to present it to the court?!?! I really think this is all a smokescreen and last ditch effort by the D at the 11th hour, and that the so called lead/tip on alternative perpetrator scenario(s) is coming from SM/Youtube internet crank speculation/conspiracy r/t a name(s) that is/are already in the state’s discovery as having been looked at/examined and ruled out long ago by LE task force, and imo the Judge isn’t stupid, knows about and on to all the conspiracy nutter stuff being spewed and regurgitated across the interwebs.
I’m pretty sure if my hunch is correct, and AT submits conspiracy manufactured non-evidence and argues before the court for its admissibility, she is not only going to look foolish, she will lose aka Judge will issue ruling against as not admissible for trial and that will be the end of it as far as the court is concerned. But I’m sure it won’t stop the unscrupulous SM/internet cranks from continuing to spew conspiracies and blame, shame and defame innocent victims and other innocent people on the periphery of the case, sadly and unfortunately.
IMHOO
ETA-clarification