Thanks for update unreal stuff
Broden issued a statement that read: “I believe I fulfilled my ethical responsibility by bringing this scientifically impossible contradiction in testimony to an impartial judge to determine if a Court of Inquiry should be initiated. I am disappointed that this process was not completed as contemplated by the Code of Criminal Procedure. Having fulfilled my ethical responsibility, I consider my role in this matter to be concluded. Of course, it will be up to any other attorneys aware of the scientifically impossible contradiction in the testimony at the August 8, 2017 to determine whether another Court of Inquiry should be requested so that a decision can be made after a judge takes testimony and evidence on the matter. Likewise, it will be up to the public to compare the testimony from the August 8, 2017 and come to their own conclusions.”