That's the part that gets me. It seems that if there is a time a person should be able to have "free speech", then that time oughta be when you are defending your good name!
If any evidence is not alowwed to be presented, seems that would be an appealable issue itself.
I am also curious and haven't seen the details about whether he was pro se or not.
That is exactly the point. In his trial he was forbidden to raise constitutional issues because they are appellate court process. He was in a federal district court. NOW he may raise constitutional issues if Fincher decides to appeal his conviction in an appellate court.