- Joined
- Sep 11, 2024
- Messages
- 2,210
- Reaction score
- 26,711
Yet no objections by the D if that were the case? Asking, not jabbing.Heresay - yes! Seen this mentioned by Lawyer Lee and Andrea B.
JMO MOO JMT
Yet no objections by the D if that were the case? Asking, not jabbing.Heresay - yes! Seen this mentioned by Lawyer Lee and Andrea B.
JMO MOO JMT
I'm not sure about Indiana courts---but usually the prosecution gets a very short rebuttal after the defense rests---they can only present evidence in response to something the defense set forth. They can recall an expert, for example to clarify something the D expert may have said.Ah - do they get another go around?
I must say I do find it so funny how much pre-trial handwringing there was about discovery then at trial stuff is being discovered on the day which has happened in virtually every US trial i have followed.
Court in recess until rebuttal witnesses arrive. State, judge, and jury caught off guard by the defense resting.
And I must say I am shocked he took that bridge walk with 3 beers in him. It had been entertained but I always dismissed it.The crime scene makes perfect sense if you’re talking about a mentally ill killer under the influence of alcohol.
They might not see the need for rebuttal and rely on closing statement.I'm not sure about Indiana courts---but usually the prosecution gets a very short rebuttal after the defense rests---they can only present evidence in response to something the defense set forth. They can recall an expert, for example to clarify something the D expert may have said.
That was expected, and the fact that we were looking forward to that is probably why they didn’t call her.Wasn't KA supposed to testify for the defense?
Guess that would have been too risky with what the prosecution would have gotten out on crossWasn't KA supposed to testify for the defense?
You can tell if a body has been moved hours after death. It would have been noted at the time.Sounds like the bodies were not there until after 10 imo. Moo.
The defense objected.Yet no objections by the D if that were the case? Asking, not jabbing.
It sounds like they didn't even need the time they actually did take. Finishing early several days and stalling in questioning witnesses another day.I guess the Defense didn't need three weeks after all.
JMO
Guess that would have been too risky with what the prosecution would have gotten out on cross
Again, just more dramatics from the defense. When the state wanted to introduce the google searches they said something to Kathy about we will need you to testify like we talked about. They said she would testify that she used that account also. IMOWasn't KA supposed to testify for the defense?
I could be wrong but the state did recall the 2 cellphone witnesses, Cecil & Bunner yesterday. Point being, the rebuttal may take place immediately after the D’s witness. Not a lawyer & not using that other acronym.I'm not sure about Indiana courts---but usually the prosecution gets a very short rebuttal after the defense rests---they can only present evidence in response to something the defense set forth. They can recall an expert, for example to clarify something the D expert may have said.
I don’t think it was moved. I just wonder when it arrived there. So many mistakes in this case that could maybe cost the state the case or could send a guy wrongfully to prison.You can tell if a body has been moved hours after death. It would have been noted at the time.