The imbalance of sustaining and overruling, depending on which side, was way too obvious.
It is my belief that a judge needs to be beyond fair to the defense in a death penalty case. If it is a crime to murder (and it certainly is), it is of equal shame to convict an innocent man without a reasonable presentation of all defense points. Mudd truly did overrule before Feldman could finish, time and time again.
If the prosecution's case is so supported by a "mountain of evidence", why not let the defense present everything the law allows?
Judge Mudd's "discretion" was more like his "directions'. He played every card in favor of the proscecution, right down to refusing to sequester the jury. Shameful performance !!!!!!
Not only did he not SEQUESTOR the JURY when it was obvious they could be influenced by a HIGHLY BIASED SOURCE like COURT-TV which was given special consideration for FILMING the TRIAL, and even after the JUDGE had warned them several times about concerns they were being influenced by watching TV about the TRIAL, and
THEN AFTER JURORS THEMSELVES TWICE SENT NOTES TO THE JUDGE ASKING TO BE SEQUESTORED,
He still denied it.