Then you would keep that information from the jury, is that correct? You would not give them the opportunity to determine its relevance and would instead foist your own opinion on that subject on them by denying them the opportunity to determine that on their own?
I think it is very relevant. It is arguable about whether it is an indication of his state of mind and therefore the jury should be allowed to consider it. To deny facts from the jury because you don't think it is important or you have a different opinion as to its meaning is to impose your own opinion on the justice system and to deny the jury the opportunity to come to the opposite conclusion.
My judgment would be not to tell the jury if he simply remained silent. I’ve sat on juries and I’m not convinced they’re equipped to read the defendants mind on this. I don’t face this sort of decision every day, so I’m not going to pretend I know I’m right.
Should the jury get the right to determine silence must mean he didn’t care? It’s something they cannot know for sure.
My answer is no.