I've been thinking about that
evidence. If the judge is supposed to be deciding whether this trial goes
to court based on the evidence, then the thing for him to do since the evidence
presented is obviously against the prosecution, is to demand they show what they
have before he makes his decision. He can't rule on what they "might"
have. He can only rule on what is presented in the prelim. You think
he will do that in order to be fair? I'm betting he
won't.
Charles Mims
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 12:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Sndbox] Providing clarification
He could be counting on knowing his jury pool...there are cases all the time that prosecutor's bring against people that will enhance their career. This is the kind of case that will make or break him, maybe he's willing to take a gamble
pretty big gamble if there really is no evidense
________________________________
Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
