WOW, Willis’s defense had NO good reason to attack Bradley. His testimony was NOT as detrimental as it could have been. Willis’s defense team STUPIDLY opened a can of worms regarding privilege. Willis’s team wanted Bradley to have privilege in matters favorable to them but they encouraged him not to claim privilege in matters favorable to them.
This case is crazy
You’re right. This is so convoluted. I have a hard time deciding which side a witness is testifying for or against.
This dude with the man bun is super weird. Or maybe it’s not a bun b but a beehive.
“WOW, Willis’s defense had NO good reason to attack Bradley. His testimony was NOT as detrimental as it could have been. Willis’s defense team STUPIDLY opened a can of worms regarding privilege. Willis’s team wanted Bradley to have privilege in matters favorable to them but they encouraged him not to claim privilege in matters favorable to them.”
I agree with that point. Bradley’s testimony was questionable at times and it WAS obvious he was lying and was trying to protect Willis. However, he did very little damage to Willis’ defense. Apparently her attorneys KNOW that he knows even more and that the judge picked up on that fact. Therefore, they had to attack his credibility.
I think the judge was becoming irritated at the State’s attorneys constantly calling objections due to “privileged” information, but then abandoning that position when they wanted him to bolster their side. I don’t think the judge will buy their tactics.
Also, it is possible that their actions will piss him off so bad that when he speaks to the judge in chambers, he will spill his guts to the judge and admit he was between a rock and a hard place due to threats by Willis. Remember, he knows the judge personally and professionally so he may ask the judge to “get him out of this jam”.
The State took a witness that was on their side and gave him reason to abandon that position and move to the middle or even to the other side.