[thegagline]

Limiting a closing argument to what is permissible in a closing argument is not forcing anyone to jump through “numerous hoops.”

[Oystir]

I don’t believe you statement will be understood. But, thank you for posing the reality of the situation.

[Vermont Lt]

Sssssh….

People here have watched Law and Order….they are better judges of what is appropriate in a court.

/ssarc

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Limiting a closing argument to what is permissible in a closing argument is not forcing anyone to jump through “numerous hoops.”

What about not allowing a defendant to plead innocent in the first place?

[Nervous Tick]

>> Limiting a closing argument to what is permissible in a closing argument

Closing arguments deserve, and get, WIDE — did you get that trump hater? — WIDE latitude. And you know damn well that President Trump will NOT get the latitude afforded to non-railroaded “defendants”. Yet another gratuitous slap at our President from FR’s premier trump hater.

[bosco24]

“Limiting a closing argument to what is permissible in a closing argument is not forcing anyone to jump through “numerous hoops.”

Very strange. I wonder if it was permissible that he states he is innocent in closing argument? Probably not, this judge found him guilty before the hearing therfore his innocents is not a relevant, material fact.

I think you are wrong.