What will we argue when we are defense?
There is simply not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey did this. All evidence is circumstantial?
How do we answer that (and keep our confidence) when we are prosecution?
If defense brings up --
The bomb was clearly not intended to go off . The timer may have been set for 3 p.m. -- according to the prosecution expert -- and Casey would know that the garbage was emptied after lunch (12 something).
We can say that -- They are admitting the possibility that our expert is right, and kids don't necessarily know when the trash is emptied. They would be in class by the time it is.
If defense claims . . . that seeing Casey's R-Place page may have given Sawyer the idea to "frame" him, . . .
Can we object that Sawyer is not the one being accused here? -- as a response to any allegations that Sawyer is a bad player?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment