So do you believe Neal Westerfield? Do you think DW is behind the child rape porno collecting?
That is what I heard in today's testimony, which refutes one of the contentions often floated by the "DAW is Innocent" faction.
A few have suggested that the chance is small, for all of the damning evidence against DAW to have been "coincidence." In other words, that it has a low probability.
I predict a hung jury. I cannot predict a vote count. I expect some jurors will see it as you do.
I believe the folks on this thread who maintain that DAW is innocent are not representative, of an average jury, hearing all of the evidence as presented in court. The evidence as presented in court is much different than the totality of discussion on this thread.
The DAW is Innocent faction make many excellent points, on some items of evidence; on others they are weak.
I give you credit for hanging in there, absorbing the ridicule. Many intelligent posters have left, after a day or two, because of the juvenile tone and ridicule.
I'm waiting for the balance of the trial, including how both sides conclude.
Not being an attorney, I don't see that either side wins, based on attorney performance. Maybe that will change.
At the end, I might conclude for "reasonable doubt"; I don't know yet. If the criteria was "preponderance of evidence," I feel it meets that test, at this point. (I know the former is the standard, so I don't need correcting).