I guess what I’m really saying is that I would have been much more confident in a guilty verdict if the jury had come to that decision after hearing all of the evidence that was improperly (IMO) excluded.
May I ask what you feel was improperly excluded, and also why you feel "improperly"? Full disclosure, I'm a few pages behind so if you've answered, please just point me with my apologies or I'll catch up with my apologies lol
IIRC, I will try to find the link, when JG tried to dismiss the DT, I thought she said (or did SCoIN say??) that if RA chose to keep that DT, he couldn't appeal based on ineffective counsel. I thought I heard that, please does anyone have another link handy?
The Odinism defense was determined to be ineffectual, is that the word, no proof. We can't be bringing any random theories into trial without some proof, right? I didn't see proof of this (not a lawyer), did you? The sticks/branches, I suppose that's subjective. Some people see a pattern, some people see covering.
SODDI defense, AFAIK these other people had alibis, right? And were cleared... how do they prove some kind of conspiracy or is that even relevant?
I am genuinely interested, appreciate any input!
CARROLL COUNTY, Ind. — The latest hearing in the case against accused killer Richard Allen was due to start at 9 a.m. in the third-floor courtroom of Carroll Circuit Court in Delphi today. Al…
fox59.com
ETA...re the ineffective counsel or SODDI commentary on my part is only some of what I've heard that can be challenged on appeal. Not a lawyer.