Originally posted by NUKE
Syz and Chairboy, care to elaborate?
Sure, I'd be happy to elaborate for ya!
First, if you think what comes out at trial, from the mouths of lawyers are true facts, you really do live in la la land. First thing the judges tell the jury is that what the lawyers say isn't evidence and should not be considered as such.
Second, if you believe something stated by a witness means it's a fact, then you really do live in la la land. I guess you don't know that witnesses are often mistaken, or (gasp) even lie.
Third, if you think you can trust anything other than the official trial transcript about what is said in a trial, you really do live in la la land. I can't count the number of misquotes I've been involed with in all sorts of news media. Come to think of it, I've spent some signficant time correcting erroneous trial transcripts as well.
Fact is that nobody knows how long he lived. It's just conjecture. Period. That's why lawyers say things like "probably" and "may have" and "or so". There's lots of competeing evidence. One doctor said blood splatters and hand prints on the door pocket indicated the guy was conscious enough to try to pull himself out. Another doctor said he never regained consciousness.
Who know? I sure don't. But I do know that I can see absolutley nothing at all in that women's behavior to justify any feelings of sorrow for her.
There, do you feel better now?