"She doesn't have a current defense in the court.The defense in court is all that matters in the trial, not media" Huh? I don't even know what this means. According to you her defense is "that she was not of sane state…
You are technically correct but I don't see what the contradiction is. You could say that his testimony was 'overwhelming evidence' (he practically admitted to doing what he was accused of). Yes, improperly obtained and…
Not a lawyer or legal expert. But American juries are generally unpredictable and overwhelming evidence doesn't always decide cases (look at the O.J Simpson trial or more recently Bill Cosby or the first Epstein case).…
Those are not exactly the same thing. And it would undercut her current defense which is "I was just doing my best and we failed and business failure isn't a crime"
I've followed the case fairly closely. I'm not aware that this is part of her defense. Where did you get this from?
"She doesn't have a current defense in the court.The defense in court is all that matters in the trial, not media" Huh? I don't even know what this means. According to you her defense is "that she was not of sane state…
You are technically correct but I don't see what the contradiction is. You could say that his testimony was 'overwhelming evidence' (he practically admitted to doing what he was accused of). Yes, improperly obtained and…
Not a lawyer or legal expert. But American juries are generally unpredictable and overwhelming evidence doesn't always decide cases (look at the O.J Simpson trial or more recently Bill Cosby or the first Epstein case).…
Those are not exactly the same thing. And it would undercut her current defense which is "I was just doing my best and we failed and business failure isn't a crime"
I've followed the case fairly closely. I'm not aware that this is part of her defense. Where did you get this from?