[backrow]

The latest I saw, was on the continuation until March 20th.

Prosecution brought up the spitting incident, and wanted the hearing held regardless. Judge went with the continuence.


I have also heard the prosecution evidence is weak, but that may be media bias.

I've studied a little Criminal Law, some Administrative Law, some Appropriation Law, and some Business Law over the years.

I know enough that I don't want to hazard a guess on S. Taylor and the trial outcome.

This much I know. Prosecution has to prove beyond a shadow of doubt.

Defense only needs to bring in enough of a shadow, and so it all boils down to:

He said, He said.


S. Taylor may never make it to trial, or the charge may be reduced, or the jury may not buy the prosecution's proof.