@JulieCar94 I am anxiously awaiting the day that we see one of these attorney content creators disciplined for violating the rules of professional conduct.
@TheCarolErskine@BrianEntin@defense_diaries@mikerreports@wbz@Bward3 The judge did conduct an individual voir dire of each juror in which each affirmed their ability to act in accordance with their oath. Further inquiry by the judge would have been improper b/c the affirmation signaled that the juror did not believe his doubt was reasonable.
@HeresyWatch@ProsecutorsPod I mean, you don’t have to tell me. I was hoping my sarcasm and dismay would be effectively conveyed through Bunk.
It’s a quote by the jury foreperson, who also claims juror x said he had reasonable doubt.
@ProsecutorsPod Unnerving yet intriguing. Saw this shared by @jcow1969 as well…I’m a big fan of “Nathan for You,” and its comedic genius is driven by Fielder’s persona (awkward & uncomfortable). Curious to see how that translates here—same persona, very different subject in Holmes.
@ProsecutorsPod I am also wondering what instruction was given to the jury. Sit tight, I guess? 11 of them making small talk about Laor Day plans while staring daggers at the presumed lone holdout?
@LawyerYouKnow Perhaps discussion with attorneys such as Eric Bland, @TympanickLaw, or @ProsecutorsPod would produce less of an echo chamber than content generated by guests such Melanie Little or Mark Bederow. There are attorneys out there with differing viewpoints.
@ProsecutorsPod Gotta love the catchphrases of the FKR lexicon. “The ARCCA experts are completely independent.” “There’s so much reasonable doubt.” “There’s no evidence John O’Keefe was hit by a car.” Now we have “the Commonwealth is changing its whole theory in the middle of trial.” 😂
@ProsecutorsPod Brennan has done a tremendous job of timing the witnesses such that cross-examination inevitably ends up a mess. Putting Jen on fairly early, against the backdrop of Whiffin’s damning testimony, was a great move to disarm Jackson and render him completely ineffective.
@EricChristens18@KYMaverick1 It goes to a trial judge’s discretion in the matter, allwng “substantial latitude in refusing waivers of conflicts of interest,” even in cases where only potential for conflict exists. Closer to the mark than Gonzalez-Lopez, in which there were no countervailing interests at play
@ProsecutorsPod Unfortunately, I fear that many don’t see the lapses in logic. To them, I would say that credibility is powerful and to consider who has more—2 FT practicing attorneys who use their platform to promote ethics in the true-crime space or lawyers who run off of Super Chats?
@porcinerugby @ProsecutorsPod@zachbryanL “If We Were Vampires” is such a poignant piece; it evokes a painfully strong sense of nostalgia and is one of the few songs that I find emotionally overbearing (i.e., too sad to listen to).
@joanieknits@coltsgirl8 It’s such an obvious conclusion that an expert wasn’t needed, as demonstrated by the fact that a quick Google search revealed it as common
@ProsecutorsPod Tangentially interesting development/rumor via r/thegirlinthephoto subreddit—a FB group was created in hopes of identifying the girl in the photo that was found in the shed with Asha’s belongings, and a woman has reportedly reached out to say that she is the girl in the photo.
@RebeccaKalyani@ProsecutorsPod 😭The comments expressing opposition to this opinion are so absurd that I can’t help but chuckle. In no way, shape, or form is there any evidence in the public record that “proves” him not guilty.
@carriecherry75 Anything out of Karen’s mouth which included the phrase “hit him” is pretty damning. No reason for her to think that. If you want to attribute the planting of the thought to Jen, then it wouldn’t make sense for mastermind Jen to only later start claiming Karen said she him