I believe they CUT OUT the areas that were stained, leaving NOTHING else to test. This is a part of the testimony.
As far as Feldman, I know nothing else about the man or his history, besides this trial. I feel unqualified to make any judgment of his conduct of the trial myself. During the trial, I did get involved in making judgments about both lawyers, and neither I nor most of the posters who did the same, had any right.
As I stated, the questions raised about why Feldman did or did not do certain things that most people experience as normally being done in a trial, make me question whether or not he was bought. That in no way proves he was.
Someone who is a personal /business acquaintence of Feldman would have more to offer on his professionalism and trust.
The fact that Mudd didn't sequester the jury after being asked by the jurors themselves makes one question his motives too. Was he controlled,bought, whatever to ensure the outcome of the trial? Makes one wonder.
As to the rush to trial, duh, that was a defense tactic to hamstring prosecutions ability to test the evidence he knew was condemnatory to his client.
You are assuming this yourself. You have no proof, do you? There were many thoughts on why they went to trial so early, including the fact that DW wanted it done that way, not Feldman, so he could see what he could save of his life, after being accused.
See, you and Cyncooper, and sometimes Redlipstick, and many others repeat this same thing. You explain your view or opinion of why something happened, but you state it as a fact. Others read this and assume it is. That is why so many times you are asked to back it up with proof. Can you provide proof that This is why they went to trial early?