It was the evidence presented so far with the shirt. The legal analyst also brought up why didnt MB shoot RG when he was on top of him if he wanted them dead.
Both the legal analyst and criminal defense attorney thought the prosecution could do a better job of explaining where everyone was.
Do you remember any reference yet about a crime scene log that the police would done about who arrives when and who leaves when?
My attorney friend said that is one of the first things that should be established at the scene as police arrive.
NJ is very specific about the requirements that must be met to successfully claim self defense. If all LK and RG had were their fists and a cell phone, MB couldn’t legally shoot/shoot at them with a gun and claim self defense.
As for MB shooting RG when he was on top of him, we’ve been told there were only three bullets in the gun, and he shot three before RG tackled him. Maybe I missed where it was stated there were more than three bullets; I didn’t catch the entire thing today. No idea what the shirt could have to do with self defense without more details.
I did not realize until reading that article that most of the jurors were men. It could easily end up that all 12 of them will be men when it comes time to make a decision. I wonder if that will turn out to be a factor.
I appreciate the clarification, @rothmpp! I had absolutely no clue who he was or what that website was in advance. It was interesting. It seems they are all groupies who listen to/watch trials? They seem to know each other and seem to have their own dialogue. It made me laugh that the shuffling of papers, etc, by this judge were apparently annoying but nowhere near as annoying as the judge in Florida who typed with her nails, apparently!
I did notice that they asked the first responding officer if this was his first time on an active shooter scene, and he said it was. So I can understand if it was all very new to him, but it seems like they should still have the training to stick to the standard procedure.
I’m avoiding offering an opinion but I think there is significant room for doubt on a few points, recognizing that I need to go back and watch the testimony again:
After RG was ordered to release the defendant, he remained on the ground. Heymer had to physically move him at RG’s direction to reveal the gun. The gun was not in his hand but was “near” his hand.
The testimony about where all three parties were relative to the medical bag in the later photo was problematic for me. Heymer testified that LK was “in the same area as the medical bags”, near the patio furniture. RG and MB were, according to him, to the right of the medical bags nearer to the house stairs. If that is true, his recall is questionable, as he said this image is “basically what [he] saw when [he] arrived” but earlier in his testimony he said that Barisone was in the “middle of the driveway” when he pulled in. Then, we have Lauren, who by his later description is unable to traverse the area around the house, yet has somehow teleported from where he saw her (where the medical bags were located in the photo) to where she received medical attention (significantly further to the right, between the umbrella stand and what appears to be a blue and white umbrella on the ground).
This isn’t a huge area of dimensional space, but that’s a significant discrepancy in my opinion.
I agree with the analyst and the defense attorney that the prosecution did not characterize where everyone was clearly.