[SilentWitness]

A sunny hello from Poway, CA!

Multi-year lurker, 1st time 'talker'. I enjoy and appreciate all the comments here from all views. Learn a lot.

Please bear with my slowness and/or typing. I do have a question regarding the jury instruction to handle a fact/evidence determined circumstantial in nature. If there are 2 reasonable explanations for its existence, then it must serve the defendant, otherwise one discards the fact/evidence in whole? If true, then the jury may then proceed to the next fact/evidence?

If true, then why didn’t Feldman object to Dusek’s misstatement of the law; you have to look at the big picture than apply reasonableness? Thanks.

[mommya]

That's what I'd like to know.