One thing I was wondering: What do you think Chris Coleman's lawyers' defense is going to be, based on what we know now (assuming it's all true)?
From what I understand Jose Baez is going for the "attack the science" defense for Kaycee Anthony. I haven't been keeping up with that tragedy, so they may be switching gears. Anyway, it seems to be a common "play" used by defense attorneys.
I wonder how much longer defense lawyers are going to be able to get results with that one though. It just seems to me that it is getting harder and harder to find people who have not been been affected by the miracles of modern medicine and the science behind them. The science of law enforcement is different than the science of medicine, but to my eye it seems like there are more similarities than there are differences and the advances in one lead to advances in the other.
I don't know if other people see it this way, but it seems to me that this would also increase your average person's trust and faith in science. I also think that the experience scientists and prosecutors have with presenting this evidence in ways jurors can relate to is increasing as well. I'd also guess that law enforcement is also much more experienced in effectively collecting this evidence. Which leads another defense tactic of attacking the chain of evidence. (At least that is what I think it is called.) The defense really doesn't stand a chance with that because I'm assuming that MCS did the collecting or monitored it and MCS really is beyond reproach.
How do you think they'll explain the time of death having taken place while Chris admitted he was still in the home?
More of that whole attacking the science song and dance possibly. If not that then attacking the scientist maybe?
I know that it really looked like Dr. Perper was not provided with accurate information when he questioned Dr. Baden's autopsy report , but it did get me to wondering about why Dr. Perper was so quick to take a critical stance. Professional jealousy is a possible explanation. Those doctors often have egos. Maybe I am charmed by Dr. Perper, but I tend to question the motives of some of the "talking heads", but not his.
So I looked into Baden and it really looks like he sold out by testifying for Phil Spector's defense. He claimed to have an "Aha moment" but to me it looks like he pulled something out of his butt and tried to sell it based on his good name. Maybe Dr. Perper feels like Baden sold the soul of science out for a chunk of change, not to mention the fact that his wife was a member of the defense. So I really wouldn't blame Dr. Perper if he did. Based on what I've read, if I would have been a member of that jury, I would have felt like the defense was insulting my intelligence.
But I don't know if that's even something that can be done. Plus, Dr. Baden does have a name and been involved with famous cases like JFK, Martin Luther King, and Sid Viscious.
The "threats" which supposedly were printed out on his OWN computer?
I don't know because I don't know how they determine that, but maybe they will say that it is possible that someone else had access to the computer at JMM.
Chris calling and checking on Sheri and the boys 15 minutes after he left for the gym?
He had a gut feeling maybe... Intuition from working as a professional security guard. But I think that CC would have to testify to that himself, and I believe that that is considered a big no, no.
The neighbors' reports of screaming in the house around 3 am the morning of the murders?
He'd made dinner the night before, there was a bit of romance in the air... This is another one I have no idea about. Maybe question the neighbors and attack their testimony: are they sure it was coming from the Coleman's, if it sounded like someone was in danger why didn't you call someone, were you fully awake etc.
I'm just having a hard time contemplating how on earth a defense will be able to explain all these things away. I'm anxious to hear some of your ideas on how those Margulis brothers plan on explaining all this circumstantial evidence.
They can try to explain things until they are blue in the face, but it doesn't look to me like there is a snowball's chance in h3ll that it is going to get their client off. They only chance that they have would be to plea it out, but I don't think that they would do that, and I don't know if they will even offer it.
And finally, thank you for the wonderful welcome. I'm a full-time graduate student, so I'm not going to be able to post as much as I'd like to, but if I had my way I'd spend at least 12 hours a day on WS!
