To: Canadian Outrage
You're probably right, CO, but on the surface it seems like a waste of time and tax-payer's money to me (remember all the experts that were hired), especially IF THEY HAD THE EVIDENCE THAT HE DID THE TAPING TO THE BODY. Would it really matter how he transported her to the bay? She could have been in the truck (cab or gun rack "hickey" for the lack of the correct term), or floor of the truck, in garbage bags or something else. Who cares about the hair in dispute, if they have a fingerprint on the tape of her body? I'm sure I must not be making sense.
To: Sandylapper
It's NOT a waste of time. Prosecutors generally like to use as little of their evidence in a Prelim as possible. It makes perfect sense to save the Most for the Jury. Frankly, it was Geragos that dragged out the Preliminary Hearing. Especially with his Biology professor.
198 posted on
12/12/2003 5:15:30 PM PST by
Canadian Outrage
(All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
To: Sandylapper; Canadian Outrage
Don't they have to provide all evidence to prevent the possibility of a mistrial? Or, at a later date Scott/Geragos could ask for a new trial if something is omitted?
201 posted on
12/12/2003 5:21:46 PM PST by
Lucy Lake
(Spell-check is a great invention, so are turn signals.)
To: Sandylapper
Would it really matter how he transported her to the bay?Yes.
The DA would have to show "how" she ended up in the bay. Otherwise some chucking fool defense attorney will try to insinuate that Laci tied herself up in plastic and duct tape and hopped to the bay with weights attached to every limb and threw herself in where Scott was fishing. Just to spite him, of course.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson