Sorry I misread that. Which makes the judge kind of silly. Some people are addicted to an overly complicated world view. Funny that you keep lecturing on conjecture and opinion when that’s all you’ve got. It’s your OPINION base on your CONJECTURE that not enough investigation happened. Guess what, you don’t know how much investigation happened, you’re just GUESSING. Meanwhile, the facts are in, the judgement is in, get over it. There will not be any further investigation, and even if there was I’m quite confident you’d never believe it anyway.
How does it make the judge sound silly? She says there was spotty reception - she was there, you weren’t. She participated in the phone call, you didn’t.
Apparently you don’t know the difference between an opinion and conjecture. An opinion is a view based on reason, but it is not a certainty. Conjecture is a view based on speculation, a guess, a presumption.
Review my posting history. Go ahead. I’ve posted news articles and the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. My view, while not a certainty, is based on reason. Your view is based on unsubstantiated claims that the judge viewed cell phone video, etc.
This has become repetitive. Good day.