Interested Bystander
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2013
- Messages
- 3,638
- Reaction score
- 345
JJ, I am sure you know best. I have no legal experience, as you know, just gut feelings.
I guess B doesn't want to allow time for Galloway to cross examine Dr O and the money is a red herring. I really do think, at this stage in the proceedings, and given that B and C have made a killing from this case, that they should see it through. If they opt out it says to me that the problem is more than just the money.
I do think winning this case seems to be more an ego trip for B and C rather than a giving the accused a fair defence. I see B as being prepared to be less than honest in order to get a murderer off the hook; much like Roux did in the OP case. To me that is unacceptable. Of course, I view this as a bystander with no depth of legal knowledge whereas you do have a great deal of expertise to rely on.
I guess B doesn't want to allow time for Galloway to cross examine Dr O and the money is a red herring. I really do think, at this stage in the proceedings, and given that B and C have made a killing from this case, that they should see it through. If they opt out it says to me that the problem is more than just the money.
I do think winning this case seems to be more an ego trip for B and C rather than a giving the accused a fair defence. I see B as being prepared to be less than honest in order to get a murderer off the hook; much like Roux did in the OP case. To me that is unacceptable. Of course, I view this as a bystander with no depth of legal knowledge whereas you do have a great deal of expertise to rely on.