You are reading a single comment by @Stonehedge and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
FWIW, the defence’s job is to serve their client’s interests as best they can, and a ‘technicality’ in a court of law is as valid as anything.
Totally agree on this. Technicalities are important.
Reminds me of a series of cases in the UK in the 90s that found that signatures sent in compressed formats were not legally binding and also that video/photo evidence that was compressed as also not admissible in certain circumstances.
Stonehedge
Yup. 3 days of jury deliberation is a good indicator that there’s strife somewhere. FWIW, the defence’s job is to serve their client’s interests as best they can, and a ‘technicality’ in a court of law is as valid as anything. (quotations used because allowing the prosecution to -allegedly- share with the defence subpar versions of the evidence they have is a pretty big deal).