That would be crazy. I have to imagine there is some dissent somewhere. What were the charges?Jury could come back with a verdict today. Wouldn't that be fun.
This isn't true or an objective analysis of the defense closing. What specifically did he lie about?Jackson's drama queen closing summation, embarrassingly grasping at straws. He lied through out his 1 hour an 15 minutes, which he ran way over on. I wish the judge had stopped the rambling drama queen. He repeated himself over and over and over, pleading and begging the jury to see the trial his way. D+. Bottom line the jurors have already made up they're minds, this is all theater.
So glad I am not the only biased person here.Jackson's drama queen closing summation, embarrassingly grasping at straws. He lied through out his 1 hour an 15 minutes, which he ran way over on. I wish the judge had stopped the rambling drama queen. He repeated himself over and over and over, pleading and begging the jury to see the trial his way. D+. Bottom line the jurors have already made up they're minds, this is all theater.
Manslaughter and maybe some lesser included offenses to that. We haven't heard the exact charging document given to the jury, but it should be similar to what the first trial had.That would be crazy. I have to imagine there is some dissent somewhere. What were the charges?
2nd degree murder
Leaving the scene
??
Trials are not a popularity contest. Your analysis is completely wrong. The evidence is what matters. Given the evidence, plus your opinion of the defense attorneys, it is no surprise you claim otherwise. You would convict Read based simply on her choice of attorney.I think David Yannetti should have done the closing for the defense, he doesn't look as sinister as Jackson. Likability of the lawyer's carries a bunch of weight. Especially in a trial like this where there are so many variables.
I think Jackson did fine, a bit long but he made some really good points.I think David Yannetti should have done the closing for the defense, he doesn't look as sinister as Jackson. Likability of the lawyer's carries a bunch of weight. Especially in a trial like this where there are so many variables.
You just didn't like my summation, try to stay in the here and now if its possible, D+. So far Brennan is nailing it, Read was fall down drunk and full of anger. Showing some of TV clips I referenced.Did you notice @gboisjo, when I accused Brennan of lying, how I pointed out a specific lie, and explained why it's a lie? If Jackson's hour and a half was all a lie, you would have had no problem doing the same.
Specifically, what did Jackson lie about? You made the claim. If you won't back it up, that's an admission.You just didn't like my summation, try to stay in the here and now if its possible, D+. So far Brennan is nailing it, Read was fall down drunk and full of anger. Showing some of TV clips I referenced.
Totally agree, I shut Jackson's close down multiple times, I couldn't take it. I despise the man.So glad I am not the only biased person here.
Felt the same way with Brennan, droning, lying, misrepresenting. I had to stop listening as he said a bunch of crap.
Explicit bias. How can you claim you're not biased against Read and for the prosecution?Totally agree, I shut Jackson's close down multiple times, I couldn't take it. I despise the man.
Its not everything, facts do matter, but lawyer's looks and delivery matter as well, to say otherwise is ridiculous. Jackson has a venomous look, it doesn't help him in the eyes of the jury IMO.Trials are not a popularity contest. Your analysis is completely wrong. The evidence is what matters. Given the evidence, plus your opinion of the defense attorneys, it is no surprise you claim otherwise. You would convict Read based simply on her choice of attorney.
No he doesn't. That's your bias. He looks like any other person.Jackson has a venomous look
Actually agree with this, it isn't a popularity contest but it does matter how the lawyer looks and how they present everything. Optics is a big part of a trial.Its not everything, facts do matter, but lawyer's looks and delivery matter as well, to say otherwise is ridiculous. Jackson has a venomous look, it doesn't help him in the eyes of the jury IMO.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?