[cyncooper]

Um, that is why I said POSSIBLY in the post in question. It is certainly reasonable for one to anticipate the prosecutor will provide evidence to back up his assertion. Those with another point of view, that DW is innocent, certainly go far afield coming up with scenarios to explain things and that is their perogative. See the difference? I am not sitting on the jury. I get to speculate like everybody else here.

[Rheo]

Have we heard anymore about the sunglasses?..this is Feldman to Savage at trial..

Q DID YOU EVER RECOVER A PAIR OF SUNGLASSES?

A NO.

Q DO YOU RECALL SEEING OR HEARING ABOUT A PAIR OF SUNGLASSES THAT WERE CLOSE TO THE VAN DAM RESIDENCE THAT WERE SEIZED BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT?

A NO.

Q OKAY.

[cyncooper]

Post in question being #531 where I said "possibly" because it has not been offered to the jury as evidence yet.

[Freedom2specul8]

WRT:your 600, that's what opening statements are! precursor to evidence, giving the juries an idea of what they'll see. I tried to point out in my earlier mistated post that if DUSEK has lied to the jury in his opening statement, it could make him lose his case.

Good night all

[jacquej]

I missed the "possibly" in your post... went back to check, and still couldn't see it, but it is late, and my eyes are tired...

I quoted your entire post on the thread I was responding to, didn't leave any words out, honest...

[UCANSEE2]

I get to speculate like everybody else here.

I hope this is something ALL of us remember.