You remarked that RC was mostly sitting on the sidelines and letting lawyers for SGF and MB do the heavy lifting. That seems unsurprising since MB did the shooting and SGF has the big pockets. Given that her role seems fairly straightforward and she was forthcoming in admitting her role in the criminal trial, what did you expect her lawyers to be doing?
I don’t but he was paying for everything else wasn’t he? Why would he tell the farrier to not shoe her horses if she was paying the farrier and the appointment was at her request? He wouldn’t and I suspect you know that.
A delusional, angry man might well tell the farrier not to shoe her horses as payback for the building inspector visit. He had vowed to make her life miserable.
I don’t recall there was any claim that LK was not paying her board to MB or failing to pay other suppliers.
It was testified to that on the morning of August 7th he was practically despondent.
He wasn’t even angry while they were there, based on all the testimony. Crying, disheveled, broken, but not angry.
Technically, declining to testify is not taking the 5th. And 99.7% of defendants never testify. Michael is not an outlier here. But if it makes you feel better, keep saying it.
One says they are pleading the fifth amendment at any encounter with law enforcement, after Miranda warnings are read, and/or while under oath and specifically asked a question that the answer might incriminate them. This could be any witness or random dude on the street in a traffic stop.
The defendant’s right not to testify lies in the whole innocent until proven guilty, and burden of proof on the prosecution.
Do we know Michael was afraid to answer questions under oath because it might incriminate him? I don’t think we do, and I think it’s unfair to ascribe that motivation to him.