hi cemmy, if you read back thru the thread I transcribed to the best of my ability transcription is in italics
DT basically said that his expert showed that the vaginal, labial, and anal injuries were less severe than the other injuries so they signaled that they were not of a sexual intent or nature! FOR REAL HE SAID THAT! :burn:
eta: he never went near the missing nipple with that being said! (defense atty)
further eta: the jury saw the pictures... so I am not worried about the DT piece on that
Thanks - I see it now!
But wow, that is ridiculous. I can't even believe he seriously said that!