Anonymous wrote:Witness is completely wrong re being signed into different email accounts on an item. You can log into as many different Gmail accounts from the same device. How are they letting this by? It’s not hard to do.
Anonymous wrote:Anyone watching this IT guy? His whole thing is that the devices were logged in to Christine's accounts, so she must have been the one to make the Fetlife posts. But isn't it just possible that Brendon logged in with her ID? I know how to log in to my spouse's and kids' accounts. This doesn't seem to be rare.
If they can prove that posts were made from the home on the account when Christine was confirmed home, Brenden was confirmed to be at work and the nanny has an alibi that she was out of the house somewhere else, then get to it.
But I doubt it because he wouldn't wait until now to present this information.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone watching this IT guy? His whole thing is that the devices were logged in to Christine's accounts, so she must have been the one to make the Fetlife posts. But isn't it just possible that Brendon logged in with her ID? I know how to log in to my spouse's and kids' accounts. This doesn't seem to be rare.
If they can prove that posts were made from the home on the account when Christine was confirmed home, Brenden was confirmed to be at work and the nanny has an alibi that she was out of the house somewhere else, then get to it.
But I doubt it because he wouldn't wait until now to present this information.
My can’t stand this witness. He’s so sure of Brendan’s innocence. He is biased by the data. But it’s more than data, the human competent (who was actually behind the screen) matters.
We have no idea if he is sure of Brendan‘s innocence. The dude is getting paid to regurgitate information that Miller already confirmed. That the forensic show that Christine‘s laptop was used, but we there’s no way to know by who unless there is a camera in the room or a witness to doing it like Juliana.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Every time I watch Brendand's attorney, I am confused by what he's trying to accomplish and sometimes by what he's even asking. Is he terrible, or am I missing something?
i don’t think he’s terrible. i thought he did not come across smooth but was making the best of the sh.t hand he was dealt. He was doing a pretty good job with what he had to work with.
Question for the bar. did defense fumble somehow yesterday with the victim advocate by “opening the door” to allow the prosecution to inquire about the statements of the minor child?
That testimony, while not directly related to the murders, seems hard to overcome.
Anonymous wrote:The defense attorney’s constant confusion over the evidence- he is constantly corrected by the prosecuting attorney and judge as to what the item numbers are and whether they were disallowed is so bad as to seem intentional. Is he trying to confuse the jury or is he trying to give bb the possibility of appeal based on incompetent representation?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone watching this IT guy? His whole thing is that the devices were logged in to Christine's accounts, so she must have been the one to make the Fetlife posts. But isn't it just possible that Brendon logged in with her ID? I know how to log in to my spouse's and kids' accounts. This doesn't seem to be rare.
If they can prove that posts were made from the home on the account when Christine was confirmed home, Brenden was confirmed to be at work and the nanny has an alibi that she was out of the house somewhere else, then get to it.
But I doubt it because he wouldn't wait until now to present this information.
My can’t stand this witness. He’s so sure of Brendan’s innocence. He is biased by the data. But it’s more than data, the human competent (who was actually behind the screen) matters.
Anonymous wrote:Anyone watching this IT guy? His whole thing is that the devices were logged in to Christine's accounts, so she must have been the one to make the Fetlife posts. But isn't it just possible that Brendon logged in with her ID? I know how to log in to my spouse's and kids' accounts. This doesn't seem to be rare.
If they can prove that posts were made from the home on the account when Christine was confirmed home, Brenden was confirmed to be at work and the nanny has an alibi that she was out of the house somewhere else, then get to it.
But I doubt it because he wouldn't wait until now to present this information.
Anonymous wrote:The defense attorney’s constant confusion over the evidence- he is constantly corrected by the prosecuting attorney and judge as to what the item numbers are and whether they were disallowed is so bad as to seem intentional. Is he trying to confuse the jury or is he trying to give bb the possibility of appeal based on incompetent representation?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did he say he'll testify today?
No, because you didnt read anything , im going to say NO.
Court TV is reporting that Banfield will testify
i was being sarcastic if you didnt pick that up
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did he say he'll testify today?
No, because you didnt read anything , im going to say NO.
Court TV is reporting that Banfield will testify
Anonymous wrote:Every time I watch Brendand's attorney, I am confused by what he's trying to accomplish and sometimes by what he's even asking. Is he terrible, or am I missing something?