- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 23,305
- Reaction score
- 124,196
thats exactly what g4s lawyer was going for chinese whispers. its a deflection and obfuscation tactic. come up with a bold claim which doesnt change guilt under the law, but serves as a spark to erode the case and distance the defendant from the most grusome evil elements of the crime.
legally speaking g4 is guilty of all 22 charges under the conspiracy statute. but once you make this debate about a singular irrelevant(if g4 shot a bullet which killed) issue it can sway the jury thru confusion or emotion.
look at the gloves in OJ case. they did not prove innocence nor was it a scientifcly sound premise. but it swirled up enough whispers that it became the center of the defense. if the gloves dont fit you must aquit! i guess a big difference with georges lawyer is that seems to concede his client was present at murder scenes but under mitigating circumstances(yuk).this is 8 murders so hopefully the issue is dead in the water in juries mind.
. i like visiting the scenes people will follow this much better once they have their barrings. too many facts details posters and slideshows can be disorientating if you dont have a reference in your minds eye. now once the jury sees the crime scene photos, hears of the detailed planning they will understand all the pieces the wagner crime family put together in order to snuff out 8 lives and ruiin countless more.
s
True, the motion is probably an attempt to distract the jurors after they've been to the crime scenes and before they visit the Rhodens' trailers and KR's camper tomorrow. That will be a powerful tour and Nash & Parker want to distract from it as much as possible.
The complexity of the locations, crime scenes, evidence, etc. will make it hard for jurors to buy into any "red herring" theories. It was a well planned, complicated, expertly executed massacre.