How so? The missing broken tailight pieces were found at the CS not on her vehicle. That's pretty damning evidence for her.
The prosecution should be forced to show it since they are the ones that tampered with it, used it as their evidence and then lied about it as being unaltered and a true representation and that absolutely nobody was near the taillight in question.
Exactly
They testified that that taillight was the one visible in the video and nobody was near it. It was not the taillight showing in the video as the video shows proctor next to the "other" taillight. When shown correctly, it shows proctor AT the taillight in question. They then why through all the trouble to reverse the video and then dub the timestamps back inverted correctly.
Like i said, i dont see the point of watching any of the evidence that resulted in the mistrial as that was not conclusive.
It doesnt need explanation because the whole trial was deemed a mistrial. I will await the evidence in the new trial.
I guess you can just choose to live in ignorance in some of the stuff you choose to believe then. Facts are facts though.
So manufacturing evidence and then lying about ON THE STAND is just fine and dandy. Got it.
Yes i will live in my ignorance. Ignorance is bliss. A mistrial is a mistrial. There are no facts in a mistrial.
You are just trying to pick an argument over a mistrial AFAICS so yes its fine and dandy.
I know that but the whole thing was declared a mistrial. She is appealing that.
Why do you say that video was tampered with?
It's what other posters have noticed. I havent watched it myself.