Is this trial of the rails?

I get the spin on the article, and the tweeter's angle is obvious, but 3 objections during the opening statement is really frigging unusual, and my gut feeling is, it benefits the defense rather than the plaintiff in this case.

We're kind of pretending that jurors can be trusted to be honest when they say they can render an verdict based on the evidence presented, but the guy not quite on trial here, has already made a mockery out out honesty, and all he has to to do, realistically, is make this trial a shit show for appellate purposes.

Seems like he's winning. Sure, the rest of humanity may be losing, but I think this story is missing the point.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-organization-trial-2658574884/

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

Ynotisay · M

I'm not sure if the source would be considered a 'tweeter.' He's a respected journalist who has worked with major outlets. What I got from this is that it's the prosecution that's benefiting. Three sustained objections in an opening statement tells me the defense is off and running with trying to turn bullshit in to facts. And the judge isn't having it.

eli1601 · 70-79, M

The Durham trials pointed out that jurors cannot be trusted to render a verdict based on evidence so don't whine.

Add a comment...