I just listened again. She did indeed say 7 foot..then quickly corrected it to 5’ 11”…72. She didn’t say 7 foot 2 inches, so clearly (IMHO) she meant 72”. Either way she was still off the mark - but only by an inch, not more than a foot.
Kind of irrelevant really, so I wonder why it’s been highlighted so much by the pro prosecution folks? On the other hand I see the pro KR folks making mountains out of molehills as well. BTW, I’m not in either camp, which probably makes me more objective than the vast majority of people posting about the case. I read a lot of opinions from people on both sides who clearly have made up their minds without really weighing the evidence. In the end the jurors will have the final word. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a very high bar…and one the prosecution hasn’t met in my opinion. Too many loose ends. Sadly, no one will be held accountable for officer O’Keefe’s death.
I guess you missed the “it’s irrelevant” comment. Undermining expert witnesses is an art that we attorneys are pretty good at. Brennan was very happy to hear “seven two”, in the hope that someone on the jury would use that gaffe to invalidate her testimony. I’m hoping the jury is a little smarter than that.
I love reading your recap of the trial, very informative and I appreciate you being a reliable source of trial coverage. Thank you for your time 🙏
Aww! Thanks Kelly. I appreciate the kind words.💙
As always thanks for all your coverage and hopefully this will be soon over. Then you can move on to a new trial 😂
Haha! I may need a very long vacation.🤪
Hi Tuesday on Tuesday. 🤗🙏⚖️
My favorite day.😅
And well it should be! Hope hump day tomorrow brings this trial closer to an end sooner than expected.
I love your recaps!! Makes everything much clearer 😊
Thanks Elissa!
What Dr Laposada meant (and what I heard) was 5’11”, 72 (6 foot).
Hmm…
She first said 7 feet… and then she said 5’11 or 7’2.
I’m sure it was a careless mistake, but even my transcript app picked up on her saying feet.
I just listened again. She did indeed say 7 foot..then quickly corrected it to 5’ 11”…72. She didn’t say 7 foot 2 inches, so clearly (IMHO) she meant 72”. Either way she was still off the mark - but only by an inch, not more than a foot.
Kind of irrelevant really, so I wonder why it’s been highlighted so much by the pro prosecution folks? On the other hand I see the pro KR folks making mountains out of molehills as well. BTW, I’m not in either camp, which probably makes me more objective than the vast majority of people posting about the case. I read a lot of opinions from people on both sides who clearly have made up their minds without really weighing the evidence. In the end the jurors will have the final word. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a very high bar…and one the prosecution hasn’t met in my opinion. Too many loose ends. Sadly, no one will be held accountable for officer O’Keefe’s death.
I find it interesting that you think she said 72 inches when a second earlier she said 7 foot. Weird hill to die on imo. Cheers.
I guess you missed the “it’s irrelevant” comment. Undermining expert witnesses is an art that we attorneys are pretty good at. Brennan was very happy to hear “seven two”, in the hope that someone on the jury would use that gaffe to invalidate her testimony. I’m hoping the jury is a little smarter than that.
The jury is smart.
We shall see. Any predictions? I’ll peg it at 50% hung jury, 40% not guilty, 10% guilty.