IIRC the defense doesn't dispute the fact that SM was in the car with Kat, so why do we need this witness?
IIRC the defense doesn't dispute the fact that SM was in the car with Kat, so why do we need this witness?
To verify the previous testimony, that the Tom Tom GPS and Apple I-phone were removed.
And also I think because one of Kat's fingerprints was found in the car.
According to kat didn't seth have on gloves and commanded kat to put on a pair while still in the apt?
While I agree with you 100% (I'm going to play devil's advocate here) people cheat on their significant others all the time. Just a thought. I don't believe LM willingly participated either. It will be interesting to see just how Barth approaches this subject. JMOAttorney Barth has major issues to overcome in the story that Kat told him in his office. As per his opening statement he wants the jury to believe that it was Kat that killed Lizzie, using breath control during BDSM gone wrong. For this to happen, the jury has to believe that Lizzie willingly agreed to be tied up in a rope harness & have a collar that restricted movement put around her neck, they also have to believe that she allowed Kat & Seth to have consensual sex with her. Lizzie from all accounts was in a committed relationship with her girlfriend & was eager to make new friends. How does Barth get the jury to buy the story that Lizzie was a willing participant in this sex play, before it all went tragically wrong, I just dont see him overcoming this hurdle. Whatever happened that night, Lizzie was not a willing participant; therefore his client did rape & played a part in the murder of Lizzie. Sorry Barth, Im not buying what youre selling, Kat & Seth are both guilty of murder.
If the condom matches Seth's DNA then I'm sure it will be introduced. The state has certainly not finished their case.
That's what she said, but I read in one of the articles that one of her prints was found in the car (apparently the one this officer mentioned) so she must have removed them at some point.
That's what she said, but I read in one of the articles that one of her prints was found in the car (apparently the one this officer mentioned) so she must have removed them at some point.
Yes, I am just wondering which of Kats stories claimed he was not wearing one.
Was it the first story, or the second "true" story (GJ test.).
So much has gone on already I keep forgetting we still have actual evidence not yet introduced and the entire Defense case still
Morn all :seeya: On a break?
She was in Lizzi's car on the 2nd as well. I didn't catch where the fingerprint was found, but could it have been from then?
Littleone thanks for your insight but on this we will have to agree to to disagree. I have been watching also, just not from the courtroom.
I am not sure where all of these law students are sitting as there seems to be no one in the seats behind SM? Can you expand please?
I sure wish you would get verified, otherwise I will take your statements about SM as just your opinion.
Yes, I am just wondering which of Kats stories claimed he was not wearing one.
Was it the first story, or the second "true" story (GJ test.).
So much has gone on already I keep forgetting we still have actual evidence not yet introduced and the entire Defense case still
Morn all :seeya: On a break?
She was in Lizzi's car on the 2nd as well. I didn't catch where the fingerprint was found, but could it have been from then?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.