To: RoosterRedux
It’s more fuel for the fire, but as court testimony it’s hearsay.
6 posted on
03/05/2024 6:30:17 AM PST by
nagant
To: nagant
The prosecutors (Fani's counsel) filed a motion to reopen the hearing to permit more evidence.
If the motion is granted, this testimony by Yeager would be introduced by the defense (counsel opposing Fani) and would cease to be "hearsay."
9 posted on
03/05/2024 6:42:10 AM PST by
RoosterRedux
(A person who seeks the truth with a closed mind will never find it. He will only confirm his bias.)
To: nagant
It’s more fuel for the fire, but as court testimony it’s hearsay.
—
Not a lawyer but I thought “hearsay” is you repeating what someone told you that THEY had heard, not what you heard.
20 posted on
03/05/2024 7:40:05 AM PST by
CIB-173RDABN
(I am not an expert in anything, and my opinion is just that, an opinion. I may be wrong.)
To: nagant
MAYBE NOT.
IT CERTAINLY TEARS APART the claims of CLIENT/ATTORNEY PRIVILEGE WADE WAS CLAIMING...BUT NEITHER HE OR BRADLEY COULD PRODUCE a SIGNED CLIENT/ATTORNEY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES OR PRODUCE PROOF OF PAYMENT FOR SUCH SERVICES.
38 posted on
03/05/2024 9:04:49 AM PST by
ridesthemiles
(not giving up on TRUMP---EVER)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson