[pyx]

Then defense shows three witness: that testified to the court that --yes she certainly did dance with DW.
Didn't those three witnesses impeach/invalidate Brenda's entire credibility to the court--- To the point of perjury---- Isn't perjury a felony ?

Brenda Van Dam's testimony for that portion of evidence given was impeached. Judge Mudd will have to instruct the jury on that (perhaps to disregard), at the appropriate time, I suspect. IIRC, perjury requires "intent" to be shown. I'm not sure that would be easy to show without mitigating cause. In short, I really can't see the SD DA persuing Brenda Van Dam for her lies. It may also open the door, should the defense fail to win an aquittal, for an appeal.

It would political suicide to go after a "mother who had *just* lost her child".

[Rheo]

If you are still going thru transcripts, can you keep your eye out for something for me?

On the back of my notes for Sean Soriano's PH testimony, I wrote someone elses testimony...cannot figure out which forensic person it was.

They were discussing the bean bag blood and the blood on the multi colored blanket in her room.

Then it is never mentioned, by anyone, again..it becomes the pocket blanket.

I believe the exhibit # is 10-7A

Thank you!