[Devil_Anse]

Exactly. You can think of it as a game if you want, but it is indeed important to try to get a witness to come off well b/f a jury. Some people, however, can't be helped. Don't forget, also, that sometimes the opposite happens--instead of looking too scruffy for the jury to like them, a person looks too "rich". In particular, women on a jury are going to not really like a woman witness who is too fancily dressed and, well, too pretty. (Er... Amber doesn't have any worries in that department!)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1002836/posts?page=280#280

The last paragraph of that post says,

"[The tabloid article] concludes by saying, 'Amber had delighted her police handlers with this taped confession by Scott: I didn't do anything to Laci, but I know who did.' And, briefly brings up the irony of Melvin King meeting with Cory Carroll, and talking with Amber."

That does not say that Amber (or Scott) met, or spoke of, or had anything to do with Cory Carroll.

[Sandylapper]

"And, briefly brings up the irony of Melvin King meeting with Cory Carroll, and talking with Amber."

That does not say that Amber (or Scott) met, or spoke of, or had anything to do with Cory Carroll.

You're quite right, it's a dangling clause. I made a complete sentence out of it by taking the misplaced period, threw in a comma before "and" instead of after, and think I understood perfectly well what the writer was "glazing" over. Of course, that might not make Amber look too good, so we better not go there.