I’m just scratching my head over the train of thought by the prosecution team on that one. How did they even come to know about that fire? Did they just Google his name to see if there was any random thing in his background that they could possibly bring up? And then try to figure out a way to somehow shoehorn it into the cross examination?
Just to review, so far, in addition to all the local people who knew and worked with MB for years, and did not have a bad word to say about him, now we have people with a combined total of four Olympic medals vouching for his character. One bronze medal in dressage, and three gold medals in eventing, to be precise.
And the star witnesses for the prosecution were… LK, RG, and LK’s bombshell ear witness lawyer?
At first I wondered why he asked that question as well but then thought it was a way to show that LKs concern about the dryer and calling the fire marshal was well founded and not just another way to harass MB.
When coming up with a witness list, other than giving opposing counsel the names, does anyone know what other information they are required to share? Do they need a reason the name is on the list?
I think that the odds are SUBSTANTIAL that he may end up plain “not guilty” because of a combination of the prosecution’s case having some holes with respect to evidence that the police did and did not gather, & the two primary prosecution witnesses having serious credibility problems. And combine that with some degree of jury nullification, and I think MB may well walk.
It’s a significant risk though, as far as a defense strategy goes
I imagine they went over the defense witness list with LK and daddy and when she saw Dutton’s name she rejoiced that they finally had proof barn fires are dangerous. As arrogant and cocky as that family is, they probably expected the defense witnesses to be worthless.
Regardless what others have said, I think Bilinkas has done an amazing job and was brilliant in having Deniniger handle most of today with the powerfully emotional witnesses.
Yeah, no, I don’t want to hear a word out of her after this is done. I had little respect for her based on the way she handled herself after the shooting, and I have nothing in me for her now.
The theory about showing LK’s concern was genuine would be a little hard for anyone to swallow if they actually saw RG’s testimony, where he virtually admitted that the whole thing with the report about the dryer was motivated by spite.
I am a little curious about how they get the witnesses. Maybe some of our kind and helpful legal minds can answer my questions.
Do they have to issue a subpoena for every witness? Like Philip Dutton, for example? Or can they just ask them to come in without a subpoena? And if someone does not want to come in to testify, is that when they need to issue a subpoena and provide a reason for it to the judge? Or to someone else who would authorize a subpoena?
What an eye-opening post. Thank you for sharing your experiences. This thread has been very educational in many ways, particularly about the struggle of addicts and their loved ones. I know every family has their struggles, and I have been lucky to not have had personal experience with addict behavior. The strength and love that you and @Ambitious_Kate and others have shown in loving their children/step children through their struggles is to be commended.
That sounds like it’s probably the same rock where RG denied putting a recording device last week.
I wonder if they will circle back to that, the same way they did with the witnesses regarding the private conversations in the office or lounge that somehow turned up in LK’s social media feed.
To really get an accurate response to that question, you might have to break it down into the categories of people who are familiar with LK’s posting history here and elsewhere, and people who are unfamiliar with it, since that might have a big effect on the answer.
Anyone who has seen her posts here in the last couple of years might find it a bit easier to believe there was more going on in that situation than meets the eye.
I believe someone pointed out here or in a previous thread that if LK had never posted here in the aftermath, or had just made one or two comments, she probably would have had a completely different response from everyone on the BB.
Interestingly, this was the theory put forth to me by someone who knows nothing about horses who asked me what I was watching and decided to watch some of the trial. This person, by the way, is male.
