That’s a ridiculous argument.
If the defense’s motive is correct, then the defense is proposing that vigilante justice should be the law of the land. The judge cannot allow that no matter what leads to it.
I agee.
But more so, because I think it is extremely likely that ZH will be LYING when he claims his motive was defending the minor.
How did he, supposedly, get access to this CP material that no one else knew about?
Did he know the child? Had he ever met her? Had he ever met Christine?
Can he prove that he had copies of this material that was apparently only found on BP's phone by police?
Not even John Mello knew about it. (Because that would imply JM ordered ZH to kill Christine).
If it was anything to do with CP, why not report it? Why not kill BP?
What kind of message was he sending to this supposedly "demon" mother that he scattered rose petals around?
It's very easy to push people's buttons on this.
A guaranteed little button: press it and people automatically react without thinking.
How did the Richard Allen defense miss that: Claim that the two victims were exploiting younger siblings by making CP, and presto, not guilty by reason of being a hero, protecting the vulnerable from exploitation.
JMO
