Point Conclusively News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

That's the law. he will give you the written document with the charge and you will see in there that when they relied upon circumstantial evidence it's as good as direct evidence but there are some things that it has to do to be as good as direct evidence. and what it has to do, the circumstantial evidence is, the circumstances must be consistent with each other and when taken together point conclusively -- conclusively to the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. if these circumstances portray the behavior of a defendant as suspicious, the proof has failed as circumstantial evidence...

I understand his point but that point is -- evaporates when you talk about how long you are at alameda. it doesn't matter if he is there 45 minutes or 20 minutes. does it really matter how long he was there? now, i guess before you had onstar data they could be saying he said he was there 45 minutes but only there 22 minutes and spent the other 10 or 15 minutes trudging through the woods burying bloody clothes and getting rid of murder weapons. well, we may have heard that in this trial had we not gotten the onstar data from general motors that shows he drove over there, drove straight back. a...

0 fraud he had been committing for years, the defense pointing out that doesn't make any sense, all that did was landed him in law enforcement's focus. so, what we see here is the defense trying to eat away at the prosecution's case. they did that earlier by attacking forensic evidence. they spent a lot of time talking about blood splatter evidence and why that might not be a reliable indicator of guilt. and while the prosecution has the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the prosecution, in essence, has to convince the jury on each of these points. the defense only has to make that on...