See #124
I do not think this was a fair proceeding.
I think evidence was excluded and included that make it very unfair.
So much so that I think the executive branch of government should intervene.
OK, I have been down this road 10-15 times in the past 4 days. Show me a specific proffer of evidence at the trial that was rejected and let's discuss the ruling, and the decision of the FL court of appeal and/or the FL supreme court as to why they sustained it. Same challenge for evidence which was admitted over objection.
Many have wanted to make the same charge you have in general terms, but no one wants to deal in specifics.
Why am I so confident on this? Because, as Marlowe knows, this is what appellate lawyers and appellate courts do very, very well. This how parties get most retrials. Moreover, since every judge who touched this case knew he would have many judges after him looking over his shoulder, they were caaarrreeeffffuuulll in the extreme.
Bad evidentiary decisions in the trial court. Didn't happen, my friend.
So, you don't want the Clinton branch to intervene, you don't want the Army (or the Air Force either). You want a new and different law. That's OK. Let's debate it, but abandon this 'evidentiary issue' business. It only sounds good until you deal in specifics.