Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15
Mbates I'm curious as to what your thoughts on the case are?
What do you think are the strongest and weakest arguments the Crown presented?
|
Not to be coy but arguments have not been made yet. I would like to see summaries of those first because I have not really very closely followed the evidence (and media reports of the evidence very often do not include significant portions of cross-exam that are effective for the accused).
That said, the Crown apparently has what are pictures of bodies on the property. There one day, and gone the next. I predict they will use those heavily in closing argument.
If they are smart they will not comment specifically on the accused having not testified (since he has a constitutional right to remain silent) but they will say something along the lines of there being no explanation whatsoever for the photos of the bodies and DNA on handcuffs and tools other than the Crown theory it said it would prove in its opening statement.
As for weaknesses, again, I just don't know if there are enough issues raised in the Medical Examiner evidence to give a juror a nagging doubt about whether the alleged victims could still be alive. I think I read a report about the defence having the expert confirm that there was no way to say when or how the DNA got onto things at the farm and that the ME acknowledged the alleged victims could still have been alive in spite of the scene at the home.
I will say, however, the judge continually going on at length about the jurors needing to take care of themselves and unnecessarily re-stating over and over how much counselling they might need and how hard the evidence has been is problematic. It is not language consistent with impartiality. If I were the Crown I would be wishing and asking he would stop that.
What is critical at this point is getting the law and the jury instructions correct. The Crown needs to insist on language that is as favorable to the accused as possible. And not be inflammatory in their closing address.
A conviction no matter how compelling will get overturned if the jury gets wrong instructions that go to the substance of the case.