As long as you don't call them "numbnuts." No reason to get WG worked-up this morning. She's already on a roll.
Ha, thanks Wolf.
WG, your wording was just fine. I knew exactly what you meant. I just wanted to put the blame in the right direction. Lisa is not around to defend herself. From what I gather, if she had been asked she would have answered truthfully. But somebody had to ask her, and that was the defense lawyer's job. By the way, thanks for finding that bench conference and posting it. Excellent work.
I gather that had she also been asked she would have answered. And i guess i am guilty of speculating against someone that has passed, and cannot defend herself, but how was it she was able to determin it was even wax, and from a candle at that? Where was the stain that she allegedly observed? Was it on the inside, or the outside of that shirt? What was the size of alleged wax stain? There's nothing documented, and as a layperson, i feel it should have been. It'd certainly be benifical, considering it was used at trial, and, as most know, trial are subject to the appeals process and nothing ought be 'put to memory'.
The Defense did a crappy job and they didn't even need an expert of their own to be able to discredit and cause doubt, in this regard. The red fibre was used to connect Jason to the E-2, States Exhibit 44 (Stevies alleged shirt), and the blue candle wax comments were used to connect Damien to the same piece of evidence, by way of reminding the jurors a witchcraft book found at Damiens had blue candle wax on it. The Defense should never discredit or dismiss something presented at trial, as they don't know during deliberations just how much weight may be placed on something, by the Jurors.
I'll add here that the Juror that wrote this^^^ got the shirt wrong - ie: Wax on E-1 W.shirt (E-1 was the Cub Scout shirt)
Yup, never underestimate what Jurors will rely on to convict, as shown above ^^^on their chart. "Wax on book, shirt, mention."
