Page 19 - Defense Perspective News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Eve out a critical time period meaning the time right before and at the time hunter biden is filling out the form. the defense said, anything that happens after was a relapse and addicts often relapse. it's a terrible tragedy when it comes to drug addiction. hunter biden was not viewing themselves as an addict and therefore, when he filled up the phone form, he wasn't knowingly deceiving or knowingly lying. so it's going to require the jury to really take a look at the words on that form and at the defense pointed out, it doesn't say have you use are you using it says have you been addicted to...

Having a weapon. in the event that you're addicted, you're not supposed to have it. if you have an addiction, you check a box that's lying because you are addicted according to them, right? and so ultimately, at the end of the day, it's simple for them from a defense perspective. they're leaning into a whole bunch of other things in terms of what i just spoke about and whether or not at the specific time at issue he was actually addict. and if he wasn't, then he shouldn't be convicted according to the defense will see whether or not that plays out and whether or not jury ultimately accept that...

Out right out of the park -- during the opening and closing -- where they said this is not about the president's on. this is not about his last name. this is all about -- all about the fact that a foremost sent forth in answer to a question that was that -- and it was a lie. it was because of his actions, not because his last name is biden mso they really did hone in on the obvious. this is the president's son and why is his mother in a courtroom? because that's his mother. because -- so any notion that he's being persecuted because of his last name, because of it's affiliation with the presid...

Criminal intent of the the defendant. but i think most important you have to prove the so what that's not a legal requirements really a factual requirement. why should we care? why is it such a big deal? so that's the one that i think that's one of the biggest hurdles here. second thing is i go into the opening statement, what i'm gonna do is someone you said, which is two, i want to bait thin and a little bit get him to say more than he needs to say because defendants don't have to say much of anything the burden's not on them, but you want them to try to commit to something that you were pre...

Or against me, but that they were going to become someone that the rest of the jury would look to out of deference. who am i to decide? i'm not a lawyer. let's ask the lawyer. when you have three, then maybe they neutralize each other. the other thing as a lawyer, i tended to want people who were educated, people who might be able to work through sometimes complicated jury instructions. keep track of all of the evidence, and then make a very elemental decision about the evidence here. i could see -- so lawyers might be good for that reason. they might neutralize that jury of one concern that i...