He's playing her like a Piano at the moment.
I can see this lady being in a lot of trouble after this.
The absence of a photo of this bag with bottle in it could be a serious problem for the prosecution...they have her word, possibly that of a cop and the dodgy Alvarez it was ever there.
And he has also dragged out of her that the house was not secured for a period before she returned for the second round of evidence collection :eek:
The absence of a photo of this bag with bottle in it could be a serious problem for the prosecution...they have her word, possibly that of a cop and the dodgy Alvarez it was ever there.
And he has also dragged out of her that the house was not secured for a period before she returned for the second round of evidence collection :eek:
I also raised that in a previous post - I think this will be major factor, imo, for the Defence.
why didnt she take a picture of the bottle in the bag? surely that is something you would do
You would have thought so. The only thing I find heartening really is the fact that she's admitting to making some mistakes, she could have easily have "doctored" the pics/notes etc to cover her own back.
You would have thought so. The only thing I find heartening really is the fact that she's admitting to making some mistakes, she could have easily have "doctored" the pics/notes etc to cover her own back.
You're right she could have...but I also recall defence trying to press Alvarez on exactly when he drew the picture indicating the bottle in the bag...I got the impression it was not in 2009.
You're right she could have...but I also recall defence trying to press Alvarez on exactly when he drew the picture indicating the bottle in the bag...I got the impression it was not in 2009.
It did seem a tad shaky to me at the time they showed the different drawings, maybe there was some "prompting" or "refreshing" going on :rolleyes: They reminded me of a child's drawing (1st) and then an adults
It did seem a tad shaky to me at the time they showed the different drawings, maybe there was some "prompting" or "refreshing" going on :rolleyes: They reminded me of a child's drawing (1st) and then an adults
Yes - I made this point on the evening Alvarez testified, but I thought that the defence didn't press him enough on the amazing difference between the two sketches.
They did, however, ask him if the prosecution had got him to do the second drawing, and he made out that he didn't know what they meant, but then agreed that he had indeed drawn it for the prosecution.
It did seem a tad shaky to me at the time they showed the different drawings, maybe there was some "prompting" or "refreshing" going on :rolleyes: They reminded me of a child's drawing (1st) and then an adults
I'm glad you said it first...not me...at some point...possibly at prelim...I think the prosecution realised they were shaky on this.
What I don't understand is that the DA must or should have known this...instead of the snow job of droning on yesterday about juice bottles...he should have got her to say what she said on re-direct UP FRONT yesterday.
It left the door open for defence to make this point and thus cast more doubt on the conduct of that work.
And since she was supposed to be there to collect "Medical evidence" why the hell didn't she take the IV bag on that stand on 25th...if an IV stand and tubing is not medical what the heck is it. :eek:
Comments
Post #442 .
No problems, don't if you can't. I know what it's like with a little one
its not a link, someone I follow on twitter from associated press, i have no idea who he is, just has little bits about the trial
mccartneyAPAnthony McCartney
Prosecutor told judge that toxicology and other experts will be called. Says he "may" call detective who will play interview.
Dont know if im reading it wrong, but i got that as only may call that detective
EDIT: I think i may have read it wrong, looking back. It was late at night when i first saw it, im as bad as this woman
I can see this lady being in a lot of trouble after this.
The absence of a photo of this bag with bottle in it could be a serious problem for the prosecution...they have her word, possibly that of a cop and the dodgy Alvarez it was ever there.
And he has also dragged out of her that the house was not secured for a period before she returned for the second round of evidence collection :eek:
I also raised that in a previous post - I think this will be major factor, imo, for the Defence.
seems insane.
take picture of bottle in Bag THEN take the picture currently being used.:eek:
You would have thought so. The only thing I find heartening really is the fact that she's admitting to making some mistakes, she could have easily have "doctored" the pics/notes etc to cover her own back.
(unlike some in that room.....)
Yeah but those mistakes could cost / undermine the Prosecution's case. If enough witnesses are shown to make mistakes then....:(
You're right she could have...but I also recall defence trying to press Alvarez on exactly when he drew the picture indicating the bottle in the bag...I got the impression it was not in 2009.
It did seem a tad shaky to me at the time they showed the different drawings, maybe there was some "prompting" or "refreshing" going on :rolleyes: They reminded me of a child's drawing (1st) and then an adults
I know, I need to stay optimistic though
Yes - I made this point on the evening Alvarez testified, but I thought that the defence didn't press him enough on the amazing difference between the two sketches.
They did, however, ask him if the prosecution had got him to do the second drawing, and he made out that he didn't know what they meant, but then agreed that he had indeed drawn it for the prosecution.
I'm glad you said it first...not me...at some point...possibly at prelim...I think the prosecution realised they were shaky on this.
What I don't understand is that the DA must or should have known this...instead of the snow job of droning on yesterday about juice bottles...he should have got her to say what she said on re-direct UP FRONT yesterday.
It left the door open for defence to make this point and thus cast more doubt on the conduct of that work.
And since she was supposed to be there to collect "Medical evidence" why the hell didn't she take the IV bag on that stand on 25th...if an IV stand and tubing is not medical what the heck is it. :eek:
I can see this being a very long stint.
I think we'll have him rest of the night
I'm finding him quite interesting at the moment, amazing what I've learnt since this trial started.
I'm wondering who, from the Defence, is going to take on this confident/self assured witness!