• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      173 months ago

      My understanding is that prosecutors need concrete evidence to secure a conviction. They have to demonstrate that the accused individual was indeed present at the scene of the crime. I’m guessing that will be extremely difficult to obtain a guilty verdict with circumstantial evidence like that. I would also imagine that many defense attorneys are willing to work pro bono for this case.

    • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      93 months ago

      Yeah, I was cautiously skeptical from the beginning but there’s way too many pieces including his statements during arrest. I’d be shocked if it somehow wasn’t him at this point.

      Strange for him to lie about the money of all things. Almost makes me wonder if that particular part actually was planted.

      • glans [it/its]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        53 months ago

        I’m thinking it could be like OJ Simpson: he was guilty and framed. Totally not mutually exclusive.

        • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          No, there was video of him being arrested at the McDonald’s circulating out there. Paraphrasing but he was pretty defiant screaming “this is an insult to the intelligence of the american people!” Et al. Taken in the context of everything else…seems pretty clear. I’m open minded to the idea that stuff was also planted and there’s some shadiness…but I do think he’s the guy right now.