It has always given me pause that some pieces of evidence may not be what they seem (and knowingly so by whomever introduced that evidence) and how an appeals court may view it, it may not even matter that she looks even worse given the truth about the piece of evidence. It may come down to the wit of her attnys and how they plead unfair prosecution advantage with things both sides knew weren't what they were shown to be during the trial. I'm not nervous, just wondering if these will come into the appeal.
I understand. But appellate judges give enormously huge wide gigantic and forgiving latitude to trial attorneys' strategies. Which is what stipulating to evidence is. The tape, the nude pics...both sides stipulated.
I'm really pretty sure its all good as far as the trial and appeals go. But.....definitely not for understanding the whole story.
