Replies

This case is a perfect example on how a judge can manipulate a jury verdict by excluding relevant evidence, commenting on the testimony, and abusing his discretion in the way he handles objections. Mudd was not impartial at all in this case. He did everything he could to insure DW was convicted. Whether DW actually killed Danielle, or not, the system did not work; the prosecutor and the judge worked the system against DW and did society a grave injustice in doing so.

I don't know what is worse, that they knew they were doing it and don't care, or they don't even realize it.

Judge Mudd was not a push-over marshmallow like Judge Ito in the O.J. case. High-powered defense attorneys can and do turn any trial into a zoo if the presiding judge permits that.
Remember the purpose of defense attorneys in criminal cases: It is not their job to "prove the defendant innocent." It is only their job to create a cloud of confusion, like the ink cloud of a startled squid in the ocean, so their client wiill get off in the midst of it.

Congressman Billybob

Click for latest column: "The Truth of a Gravel Road."

Click for latest book: "to Restore Trust in America"