I knew it, he's going for the whole beyond reasonable doubt statement. I'm betting he reminds the jurors what it means at the end.
Its the ultimate hail mary. He didn't want to to present a lot of testimony in the end because at least I think, he feels that the jury has almost been traumatized by the evidence shown by the crown. So he doesn't want to remind the jury of what the prosecution presented.
Basically, it feels like he's saying that the stuff that you saw the crown present might have been impressive and might have been damning, but it didn't prove for sure that my client did it. And even if you have 1 doubt you have to acquit.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|