Quote:
Originally Posted by greyshep
Valerie Fortney
@ValFortney
Cross examination by defence lawyer Jim Lutz: suggests the cameras create one blended image. Yes, says Gagnon. #Garland
Defence trying to poke holes in the validity of the photos. How does this lawyer ask these types of questions without gagging on his own bile at the same time?
|
Very likely the same things were said about the defence lawyers for:
Robert Baltovich, Richard Brant, James Driskell, Anthony Hanemaayer, Clayton Johnson, Dinesh Kumar, David Milgaard, Gregory Parsons, Guy Paul Morin, Tammy Marquardt, William Mullins-Johnson, Romeo Phillion, John (Jack) Salmon, Sherry Sherrett-Robinson, Thomas Sophonow, Steven Truscott, Kyle Unger, Erin Walsh, Jack White, Ron Dalton, Randy Druken, Gordon Folland, Peter Frumusa...and every other person wrongfully convicted but not famously enough for you to have heard of them.
https://www.aidwyc.org/cases/historical/
Canada does not have a good record when it comes to wrongful convictions of people who were seen at the time as clearly guilty. If you want Garland to go to jail for the rest of his life and not need to question the validity of that result, you need Mr. Lutz asking those very questions on your behalf.
I wonder if any of the police, prosecutors, judges, and pitch-fork carrying citizenry gagged on bile at all when the convictions I listed above were undone in some cases after the best years of the person's life had been taken from them for something they never even did and the real guilty person went unpunished?