If the police have followed the proper procedures, protected the chain of custody, and have solid forensic evidence of all the things asserted by the DA, AH should cut the best deal he can get. However, those are some significant "ifs". Perhaps the forensics is more fuzzy then the DA asserts. Perhaps there is a gap in the survelliance that AH says "that's when I left". Perhaps the surveillance photos aren't as clear as the prosecutor says (" that's a book not a gun" ), perhaps perhaps perhaps. It's why we have trials.
Me? I think he is guilty and that the prosecutor wouldn't be making such detailed allegations in this very high profile case unless he could back it up. No prosecutor wants to be accused of "OJ'ing" it.
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go.
|