- Joined
- Nov 11, 2013
- Messages
- 13,533
- Reaction score
- 89,162
He’s making a good argument. Defense can’t have it both ways.Oh, my. The State says the Defense opened the door to L's relationship with the drug dealer.
He’s making a good argument. Defense can’t have it both ways.Oh, my. The State says the Defense opened the door to L's relationship with the drug dealer.
Hahaha the defense may have scr*wed their own pooch.He’s making a good argument. Defense can’t have it both ways.
Yeah, he's argued 'you can't use them to impugn the character of my defendant' when he just used the same texts to impugn the character of DY.Hahaha the defense may have scr*wed their own pooch.
She's going to have to speed read that 150 pages lol15-20min recess while she considers it
Yeah, but I guess you get used to that, being a judge. She is no doubt familiar with it, she's just going to refresh her memory.She's going to have to speed read that 150 pages lol
I hope she hurries, I have to go do real life stuff in an hour and a half and I don’t want too many recesses lol!She's going to have to speed read that 150 pages lol
I think she will allow it. And boy the prosecution sure was apprised of the Supreme Court ruling wasn't he?!Yeah, but I guess you get used to that, being a judge. She is no doubt familiar with it, she's just going to refresh her memory.
I think Hilliard thought he was clever getting the messages excluded and then sneaking them in himself to try to discredit DY. It could be a major misstep if Judge Stokes rules in favour of the prosecution.
ITA. Mr. Hilliard reminds me of (devious) Mr. Burns from the Simpsons. His appearance included. mooSee, the thing is, DY was cautioned before he took the stand that he wasn't allowed to mention her possible infidelity. If he had, it would have meant the jury heard what they were not allowed to hear, so while the defense was turning the screws, he was not free to answer honestly what he thought she was doing without risking the whole trial. And the defense KNEW this.