Was going to stop
I was honestly going to stop posting on this subject but decided to add one more. The Comments:
"]Baez needs a few more years under his belt before taking on this case that is under the microscope...I know he has been over-ruled at least 4 times as much as the prosecution on objections BUT I find the prosecution more competent
Comment: There are a number of reasons an attorney will object to a question. Some of which are: (a) To alert the witness to really think the
answer out, (b) to break any rhythm that the other attorney may have set.
There are attempt to set a rhythm so when it is broken the opposing attorney knows the witness is uncomfortable with the question and will come
back to it, etc.etc.(c) because they really object to the question. My point is that being over-ruled is not just a sign of lacking compentency but can be
a good technique when there is cross examinations.
"In regard to Cindy, George and Lee listening to testimony, I'm sure it was stated that on previous cases, it was allowed for families of defendents only!"
Comment: I am astonished that possible witness's can sit in on testimony
as it poison's the whole concept of unvarnished truthful testimony. If you
know what has been said by other witness's you have to be influenced as to
what you will testify to. In this case the parents sitting in may be significant
character's in the case and should never be allowed in the court while any
testimony is being heard. Remember it is alleged that they have their own
attorney who is only looking out for thier interests.
"Regarding Dr. Spitz, between me and you and everyone in TOTV land, do you honestly believe that the good Dr. could not determine the MANNER of death?"Seriously[COLOR=
Comments: I absolutely believe that (a) he testified truthfully as his reputation is critical to him as it reprents his life's work. (b) I absolutely
believe the manner and cause of death cannot be determined. Not only
based on his testimony but those of other experts.
|