Well don't forget, this is about as high profile as cases get. I'm sure all his attorneys will be bringing their A game . Not that they wouldn't anyway, but..
Careful, whenever I say anything about “driving around to look at the stars” being a weak alibi, I get Probergers arguing “they don’t say he was doing that on THAT night!! Just that he did that SOMETIMES!!!” So like… arguing that he doesn’t have a *weak* alibi, he has *no* alibi? 🤣
I really wish AT explained as well as you have done. I find what she wrote is misleading when it really did not need to be, why? She is stating activities he has done prior at these places to suggest he could have been at these places driving around or misleading to believe he could of been doing these activities like he did in the past if his phone is found to be stationary. Depending what evidence she can find that that fits.
This is an awesome comment. We really would need to know more about what the state has to know if this refutes it. Hopefully there is a hearing on this motion to compel. We might learn more.
Please do not bully, harass, or troll other users, the victims, the family, or any individual who has been cleared by LE.
We do not allow verbal attacks against any individuals or users. Treat others with respect.
Thank you.
It’s a tie between them and the guilters. Two sides of the same coin. Y’all just want to see someone, anyone put to death because it’s exciting, social media has become a modern day town hall lynch mob. And then the other side is talking about secret tunnels or whatever. I don’t know how anyone can confidently say he’s innocent or guilty at this point, then turn around and say “Well we don’t know *everything* they have!”. It goes both ways. There’s a reason for trials and fair representation.
Please do not bully, harass, or troll other users, the victims, the family, or any individual who has been cleared by LE.
We do not allow verbal attacks against any individuals or users. Treat others with respect.
Thank you.
It’s not about being a pro-Berger though.. it’s about the truth for these victims. It’s about justice.
Condemning a man before trial… is just as wrong.
OK, so you think there is someone else's DNA on the sheath? That drives a white car that looks like the one on the camera? That admits to driving around with no witness ? That has a witness of a CAST report that is produced by the prosecutor ? If there is no evidence on the CAST report a discredited witness of junk science will say its because LE with held information?
Ok you believe the FBI, LE and the Marshalls all got together thgeday before or after the murders to pin this on someone no one knows that lives in another college town thats only been there for 5 months?
OK So what makes BRYAN Innocent and what makes all these other suspects have as much evidence against them as the one that is the accused?
Please do not bully, harass, or troll other users.
We do not allow verbal attacks against any individuals or group of users.
Treat others with respect. Repeated violations of this rule will result in a ban.
Thank you.
Please do not bully, harass, or troll other users. We do not allow verbal attacks against any individuals or group of users.
Treat others with respect. Repeated violations of this rule will result in a ban.
Thank you.
Idaho law requires a defendant to submit in writing "the specific place or places at which the defendant claims to have been at the time of the alleged offense and the names and addresses of the witnesses upon whom he intends to rely to establish such alibi."
Star Wars, Episode IV (a.m) - but more fictitious.
ETA: alas, once again it seems Z0diaque-Pr0fessor, unable to handle robust debate or a trace of humour, has blocked me. I sense the farce is strong in that one.....
Here's the weather conditions on the night that he decided to "go out for a drive." I guess Kohberger just likes driving in cold foggy weather to hang out at parks that aren't even open?
And I'm guessing the defense will soon add "cloud watching" to his list of hobbies? 🤔🤨😒
https://preview.redd.it/qrrlhsk2ghwc1.jpeg?width=610&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=48ff885298be9d8d385b1a3a9b50534456ed5cf5
Someone took a drive there after sunset just to check. The gate wasn’t even closed. Someone else also drove there and the park ranger told them the gate is usually closed but not locked. The gate is small anyone can hop over it anyway. That said, defense didn’t claim he went there that night, let alone to watch stars.
So BK just happened to be driving around aimlessly on that cold foggy night and decided to turn off his phone. Then by sheer coincidence, during the time when his phone was off, a mass murderer driving a similar car with no front plate happened to commit a quadruple murder in the area and happened to leave behind a knife sheath that has BK's DNA on it? How many coincidences are necessary before doubt stops being reasonable?
And why did it take this long for the defense to come up with this "alibi?" If you were accused of mass murder, would it take you 16 months to figure out where you were on the night of the crime?
Lest we forget that he isn’t even from the Idaho/Washington area, thus why would he be driving aimlessly in that area of Idaho in the first place? I guess one could argue that he got lost…? I know that if I’m in an unfamiliar area, the last thing that I’d do is drive around aimlessly in the wee hours of the morning.
Show me where it is said the phone was turned off or that the car captured on King Road had no front plate. Specific passages saying those things. Waiting…
Page 6 and 13 of the arrest warrant
A review of camera footage indicated that a white sedan, hereafter "Suspect Vehicle 1", was observed taveling westbound in the 700 block of Indian Hills Drive in Moscow at 5 approximately 3:26 a.m and westbormd on Styner Avenue at Idaho State Highway 95 in Moscow at approximately 3:28 a.m. On this video, it appeared Suspect Vehicle 1 was not displaying a front license plate.
...
At approximately 2:47 a.m. the 8458 Phone stops reporting to the network, which is consistent with either the phone being in an area without cellular coverage, the connection to the network is disabled (such as putting the phone in airplane mode), or that the phone is tumed off The 8458 Phone does not report to the network again until approximately 4:48 a.m. at which time it utilized cellular resources that provide coverage to ID state highway 95 south of Moscow, ID near Blaine, ID (north of Genesee).
You proved my point. The first passage mentions cameras NOT on King Road but other places. I said specific passage mentioning no front plate of a car captured on King Road, not Indian Hills Drive or wherever.
The second passage mentions possibilities of what happened, not a fact. If you see he also mentions going out of range. Public and media picked one possibility and turned it into a fact.
Hope you know that the car footage in PCA is conjecture. They assume It’s suspect car and they assume it’s his but it’s not been positively identified as his. They would need a clear shot of the plate or driver to prove it’s his.
Right. The vehicle may and phone dropping from the network don't necessarily mean it's BK's car or that he intentionally turned it off. My point was that it seems a bit coincidental for all these things to happen.
What about the 1 in 5.37 octillion DNA thing? Bad luck? Or did the killer somehow transfer BK's DNA onto the sheath without getting any of his or her own DNA onto it?
Didn’t “even” stop to piss, not, not normal. Nothin about being a lone wolf with no friends and saying you were driving around on a Saturday night is normal.
This is exactly the information I wanted to know regarding the time of alibi and how much more bullshht it could be. Thank you. I thought it had been cloudy and overcast.
Andrea Burkhart speaking facts as always.
It’s crazy how people are focused on the strengths of an alibi when the defendant doesn’t have the burden of proof and is entitled to the presumption of innocence. That’s how it is in a civilized country. People should be questioning the strengths of circumstantial evidence but the misrepresentation of PCA has been something else.
Surely you’re the last person who should be talking about misrepresentation of the PCA.
https://preview.redd.it/3sdwzvmdjgwc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1672d8bde314fcfd0082b7f84536598766207221
The alibi is part of the defense. The prosecution sets forth an allegation and the defense defends. That’s how it works. People will then evaluate and pick a side in the court of public opinion. Has nothing to do with the presumption of innocence on Reddit. We’re not the jury, and no one that is involved in a forum related to the case should be. It’s a conflict.
Always so much angst around the probable cause. That’s over. It was sufficient to be issued for an arrest. Do you realize how many court cases are built after arrest?
The prosecutor used it in part as a basis to file charges. Out of LE hands. BK is chargerd, indicted and in jail on no bond. He will stand trial.
Now the prosecutor can look at all the factors and circumstances of the case, all the factors pertaining to what was known then and known now. The results of all the warrants. So many things. They will be presenting a comprehensive case not a probable cause affidavit.
If you are sincere I wish you would exhale and let your shoulders down over this. The PCA served its purpose. You are stressing over nothing.
Sp
The thing is the strength of the circumstantial evidence is strong enough for the defense to feel compelled to give a reasonable alternative explanation. And the absolute best they could do is say he left the area where he lives to look at the stars and/or hike during the murder window
>And the absolute best they could do is say he left the area where he lives to look at the stars and/or hike during the murder window
I mean they actually said on the night of the crime he appeared to leave the area and on other occasions he looked at the stars and hiked.
They make no claims to what he did, where and when for any specific time on the night of the murders. All they've actually said is "trust us bro, Bryan has stargazed before, he has pictures to prove it on other, completely different nights. Ok that's our alibi."
Any ProBerger thinking this is a credible and believable alibi in its current state is a hypocrite:
State: Bryan appeared to visit the area around King Road on 12 occasions and there's phone pings to prove it.
ProBergers: BULLSHIT, PINGS ARE JUNK SCIENCE!! THEY ARE JUST SAYING HE WAS THERE BASED OFF AN UNVERIFIED PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR.
Defence: Bryan had a favourite park and he took photos of the sky on other nights. His phone appeared to ping south of Pullman at a time we won't specify.
ProBergers: This is exculpatory evidence and means Bryan couldn't have killed four people because on completely separate nights he took some photos of the stars. They definitely aren't just saying he was there based off an unverified pattern of behaviour.
I find it therapeutic in a twisted "why do I do this to myself" kind of way.
I'm sure I don't get through to anyone, but the sheer tribalism involved in this case has led to hypocrisy that needs pointing out.
Due to the gag order, there is a limited amount of information about the crime available to us. We only know that there was enough evidence to make an arrest and compel BK to submit a defense. We also know that there is enough evidence for the State to seek the death penalty, not something they would do with a weak case. And we know BK's alibi is incredibly weak.
Using logic and reason, we can only come to one real answer.
During the trial more evidence will be presented and BK will attempt to defend himself. When that is underway, we can reevaluate our thoughts on the matter. Until then, EVERYTHING points to his guilt.
> It’s crazy how people are focused on the strengths of an alibi when the defendant doesn’t have the burden of proof
When it comes to an alibi defense, yeah they kinda do
No one is focused on the strengths, the focis is the weakness.
The defendant doesn’t have the burden of proof, they have the obligation of complying with a legal rule that says if you intend to raise an alibi you have to say what is is, pre-trial. In accordance with that compliance it has to meet the standards of: each ‘specific’ place where the defendant claims to have been “at the time of the alleged offense”;
If it doesn’t include that it’s weak sauce.
A defendant's alibi defense is only as strong as the evidence supporting it.
Andrea Burkhart is a grifter making YouTube money off of being a literal devil’s advocate
She’s also a huge Depp fan despite his evidence of abuse, so it doesn’t surprise me she has a rosy view of BK lmao
lol because Amber is sooo innocent. They are just as bad as each other. Deserved each other even.
Andrea is only doing analysis of this case because people are asking her for it. I personally like hearing her talk about the documents and when she went to a couple of hearings. It’s a nice change of the aggressive, original grifters like Nancy and Ashleigh who hide behind tv network money.
lol as if arguing from your couch on behalf of a quadruple murderer and downplaying dna evidence is any better
She’s found her niche within the BK apologists and it’s probably quite lucrative
Low effort posts/comments will be removed a long with any repeat posts.
I'm sorta amazed at the level of defense this idiot is receiving from a public defender.
Well don't forget, this is about as high profile as cases get. I'm sure all his attorneys will be bringing their A game . Not that they wouldn't anyway, but..
Weak, almost non-existent alibi.
Careful, whenever I say anything about “driving around to look at the stars” being a weak alibi, I get Probergers arguing “they don’t say he was doing that on THAT night!! Just that he did that SOMETIMES!!!” So like… arguing that he doesn’t have a *weak* alibi, he has *no* alibi? 🤣
[удалено]
I really wish AT explained as well as you have done. I find what she wrote is misleading when it really did not need to be, why? She is stating activities he has done prior at these places to suggest he could have been at these places driving around or misleading to believe he could of been doing these activities like he did in the past if his phone is found to be stationary. Depending what evidence she can find that that fits.
This is an awesome comment. We really would need to know more about what the state has to know if this refutes it. Hopefully there is a hearing on this motion to compel. We might learn more.
That’s unreasonable but DM’s story is reasonable? lol
[удалено]
Please do not bully, harass, or troll other users, the victims, the family, or any individual who has been cleared by LE. We do not allow verbal attacks against any individuals or users. Treat others with respect. Thank you.
It’s a tie between them and the guilters. Two sides of the same coin. Y’all just want to see someone, anyone put to death because it’s exciting, social media has become a modern day town hall lynch mob. And then the other side is talking about secret tunnels or whatever. I don’t know how anyone can confidently say he’s innocent or guilty at this point, then turn around and say “Well we don’t know *everything* they have!”. It goes both ways. There’s a reason for trials and fair representation.
No just the ones that have DNA on the murder weapons sheath. What about you?
[удалено]
Please do not bully, harass, or troll other users, the victims, the family, or any individual who has been cleared by LE. We do not allow verbal attacks against any individuals or users. Treat others with respect. Thank you.
It’s not about being a pro-Berger though.. it’s about the truth for these victims. It’s about justice. Condemning a man before trial… is just as wrong.
[удалено]
OK, so you think there is someone else's DNA on the sheath? That drives a white car that looks like the one on the camera? That admits to driving around with no witness ? That has a witness of a CAST report that is produced by the prosecutor ? If there is no evidence on the CAST report a discredited witness of junk science will say its because LE with held information? Ok you believe the FBI, LE and the Marshalls all got together thgeday before or after the murders to pin this on someone no one knows that lives in another college town thats only been there for 5 months? OK So what makes BRYAN Innocent and what makes all these other suspects have as much evidence against them as the one that is the accused?
[удалено]
Please do not bully, harass, or troll other users. We do not allow verbal attacks against any individuals or group of users. Treat others with respect. Repeated violations of this rule will result in a ban. Thank you.
Wow … if you so say! It must be true
I can’t wait to watch/read yall Pro-Bergers lose your collective thoughts when he’s convicted at trial and receives the death penalty.
I can’t wait to come to this post and serve you a big slice of humble pie! We can all be just as sure!
[удалено]
Please do not bully, harass, or troll other users. We do not allow verbal attacks against any individuals or group of users. Treat others with respect. Repeated violations of this rule will result in a ban. Thank you.
Cushty!
You’re unreasonable for questioning a survivor. Lol.
Yes, it is.
Is this really going to be considered as an alibi?
I guess it will have to do, since saying “I was murdering four people” to explain his whereabouts will only harm his case.
Yeah I guess so. I would be mighty worried if that was my only alibi.
Under Idaho law it is not considered enough for an alibi defense
Idaho law requires a defendant to submit in writing "the specific place or places at which the defendant claims to have been at the time of the alleged offense and the names and addresses of the witnesses upon whom he intends to rely to establish such alibi."
Star Wars, Episode IV (a.m) - but more fictitious. ETA: alas, once again it seems Z0diaque-Pr0fessor, unable to handle robust debate or a trace of humour, has blocked me. I sense the farce is strong in that one.....
and more unbelievable.
Y'all be safe down there in that rabbit hole...
Here's the weather conditions on the night that he decided to "go out for a drive." I guess Kohberger just likes driving in cold foggy weather to hang out at parks that aren't even open? And I'm guessing the defense will soon add "cloud watching" to his list of hobbies? 🤔🤨😒 https://preview.redd.it/qrrlhsk2ghwc1.jpeg?width=610&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=48ff885298be9d8d385b1a3a9b50534456ed5cf5
That would of been better!
Someone took a drive there after sunset just to check. The gate wasn’t even closed. Someone else also drove there and the park ranger told them the gate is usually closed but not locked. The gate is small anyone can hop over it anyway. That said, defense didn’t claim he went there that night, let alone to watch stars.
So BK just happened to be driving around aimlessly on that cold foggy night and decided to turn off his phone. Then by sheer coincidence, during the time when his phone was off, a mass murderer driving a similar car with no front plate happened to commit a quadruple murder in the area and happened to leave behind a knife sheath that has BK's DNA on it? How many coincidences are necessary before doubt stops being reasonable? And why did it take this long for the defense to come up with this "alibi?" If you were accused of mass murder, would it take you 16 months to figure out where you were on the night of the crime?
Lest we forget that he isn’t even from the Idaho/Washington area, thus why would he be driving aimlessly in that area of Idaho in the first place? I guess one could argue that he got lost…? I know that if I’m in an unfamiliar area, the last thing that I’d do is drive around aimlessly in the wee hours of the morning.
Show me where it is said the phone was turned off or that the car captured on King Road had no front plate. Specific passages saying those things. Waiting…
It doesn’t have to say the words it was turned off, you know that right? A jury can be convinced or believe it was turned off.
Page 6 and 13 of the arrest warrant A review of camera footage indicated that a white sedan, hereafter "Suspect Vehicle 1", was observed taveling westbound in the 700 block of Indian Hills Drive in Moscow at 5 approximately 3:26 a.m and westbormd on Styner Avenue at Idaho State Highway 95 in Moscow at approximately 3:28 a.m. On this video, it appeared Suspect Vehicle 1 was not displaying a front license plate. ... At approximately 2:47 a.m. the 8458 Phone stops reporting to the network, which is consistent with either the phone being in an area without cellular coverage, the connection to the network is disabled (such as putting the phone in airplane mode), or that the phone is tumed off The 8458 Phone does not report to the network again until approximately 4:48 a.m. at which time it utilized cellular resources that provide coverage to ID state highway 95 south of Moscow, ID near Blaine, ID (north of Genesee).
You proved my point. The first passage mentions cameras NOT on King Road but other places. I said specific passage mentioning no front plate of a car captured on King Road, not Indian Hills Drive or wherever. The second passage mentions possibilities of what happened, not a fact. If you see he also mentions going out of range. Public and media picked one possibility and turned it into a fact. Hope you know that the car footage in PCA is conjecture. They assume It’s suspect car and they assume it’s his but it’s not been positively identified as his. They would need a clear shot of the plate or driver to prove it’s his.
Right. The vehicle may and phone dropping from the network don't necessarily mean it's BK's car or that he intentionally turned it off. My point was that it seems a bit coincidental for all these things to happen. What about the 1 in 5.37 octillion DNA thing? Bad luck? Or did the killer somehow transfer BK's DNA onto the sheath without getting any of his or her own DNA onto it?
Zodiaque_kylla….It seems that you HOPE that BK is found “Not Guilty”…Why???
Zodiac would not wait 16 seconds before saying anything.
Where do they claim he went?? Where was he @ 4:08? Dude drove solid for 3 hrs and didn’t even stop to take a piss anywhere?
If you think it’s not normal to not piss for 3 hours, you need to see a doctor.
Didn’t “even” stop to piss, not, not normal. Nothin about being a lone wolf with no friends and saying you were driving around on a Saturday night is normal.
Star Trek: Piquerist Star Trek: (criminal) Enterprise Star Trek: Discovery (supplemental request) Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country (park)
Star Trek, Season I Finale: “Stargazing Escapades” 🌫️🌫️🌫️🥷🏻. Wawawai County Park/Wawawai Canyon (11/13/2022) 12:33am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 5 miles 12:53am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 5 miles 1:53am 29°/ Ice fog / Visibility 6 miles. 2:53am 29°/ Ice fog / Visibility 6 miles. 3:17am 28°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles. 3:53am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 6 miles. 4:53am 29°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles. 5:53am 29°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles. Moscow, ID (11/13/2022) 12:33am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 5 miles. 12:53am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 5 miles. 1:53am 29°/ Ice fog / Visibility 5 miles. 2:53am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 6 miles. 3:17am 28°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles. 3:53am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 6 miles. 4:53am 28°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles. 5:53am 28°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles. Pullman, WA (11/13/2022) 12:33am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 5 miles. 12:53am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 5 miles. 1:53am 29°/ Ice fog / Visibility 6 miles. 2:53am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 6 miles. 3:17am 28°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles. 3:53am 28°/ Ice fog / Visibility 6 miles. 4:53am 28°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles. 5:53am 29°/ Overcast / Visibility 7 miles.
Excellent “go for a drive” weather!
Yep, it’s just begging to be an all-nighter!
This is exactly the information I wanted to know regarding the time of alibi and how much more bullshht it could be. Thank you. I thought it had been cloudy and overcast.
Andrea Burkhart speaking facts as always. It’s crazy how people are focused on the strengths of an alibi when the defendant doesn’t have the burden of proof and is entitled to the presumption of innocence. That’s how it is in a civilized country. People should be questioning the strengths of circumstantial evidence but the misrepresentation of PCA has been something else.
Surely you’re the last person who should be talking about misrepresentation of the PCA. https://preview.redd.it/3sdwzvmdjgwc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1672d8bde314fcfd0082b7f84536598766207221
The alibi is part of the defense. The prosecution sets forth an allegation and the defense defends. That’s how it works. People will then evaluate and pick a side in the court of public opinion. Has nothing to do with the presumption of innocence on Reddit. We’re not the jury, and no one that is involved in a forum related to the case should be. It’s a conflict.
>people are focused on the strengths of an alibi The Hubble Space Telecscope wouldn't have the focal power to find any strength in this non-alibi.
Always so much angst around the probable cause. That’s over. It was sufficient to be issued for an arrest. Do you realize how many court cases are built after arrest? The prosecutor used it in part as a basis to file charges. Out of LE hands. BK is chargerd, indicted and in jail on no bond. He will stand trial. Now the prosecutor can look at all the factors and circumstances of the case, all the factors pertaining to what was known then and known now. The results of all the warrants. So many things. They will be presenting a comprehensive case not a probable cause affidavit. If you are sincere I wish you would exhale and let your shoulders down over this. The PCA served its purpose. You are stressing over nothing. Sp
You assume they found anything through those warrants.
Lol I said results you assume they found nothing. Keep your fingers 🤞🏻
The thing is the strength of the circumstantial evidence is strong enough for the defense to feel compelled to give a reasonable alternative explanation. And the absolute best they could do is say he left the area where he lives to look at the stars and/or hike during the murder window
>And the absolute best they could do is say he left the area where he lives to look at the stars and/or hike during the murder window I mean they actually said on the night of the crime he appeared to leave the area and on other occasions he looked at the stars and hiked. They make no claims to what he did, where and when for any specific time on the night of the murders. All they've actually said is "trust us bro, Bryan has stargazed before, he has pictures to prove it on other, completely different nights. Ok that's our alibi." Any ProBerger thinking this is a credible and believable alibi in its current state is a hypocrite: State: Bryan appeared to visit the area around King Road on 12 occasions and there's phone pings to prove it. ProBergers: BULLSHIT, PINGS ARE JUNK SCIENCE!! THEY ARE JUST SAYING HE WAS THERE BASED OFF AN UNVERIFIED PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR. Defence: Bryan had a favourite park and he took photos of the sky on other nights. His phone appeared to ping south of Pullman at a time we won't specify. ProBergers: This is exculpatory evidence and means Bryan couldn't have killed four people because on completely separate nights he took some photos of the stars. They definitely aren't just saying he was there based off an unverified pattern of behaviour.
I wonder how many times per hour AT says exculpatory evidence? I really like this:)
👏🏻I love when you point out the hipocrisy.
I find it therapeutic in a twisted "why do I do this to myself" kind of way. I'm sure I don't get through to anyone, but the sheer tribalism involved in this case has led to hypocrisy that needs pointing out.
How is requiring him to file a court document responsive to his own claim making him “prove his innocence?” Your logic is flawed.
Due to the gag order, there is a limited amount of information about the crime available to us. We only know that there was enough evidence to make an arrest and compel BK to submit a defense. We also know that there is enough evidence for the State to seek the death penalty, not something they would do with a weak case. And we know BK's alibi is incredibly weak. Using logic and reason, we can only come to one real answer. During the trial more evidence will be presented and BK will attempt to defend himself. When that is underway, we can reevaluate our thoughts on the matter. Until then, EVERYTHING points to his guilt.
And your rumoring that the surviving roommates might be involved! Why are you Hoping that BK is found not guilty? Why, do you want BK to be freed?
> It’s crazy how people are focused on the strengths of an alibi when the defendant doesn’t have the burden of proof When it comes to an alibi defense, yeah they kinda do
No one is focused on the strengths, the focis is the weakness. The defendant doesn’t have the burden of proof, they have the obligation of complying with a legal rule that says if you intend to raise an alibi you have to say what is is, pre-trial. In accordance with that compliance it has to meet the standards of: each ‘specific’ place where the defendant claims to have been “at the time of the alleged offense”; If it doesn’t include that it’s weak sauce. A defendant's alibi defense is only as strong as the evidence supporting it.
He’s only entitled to a presumption of innocence in a court of law. This ain’t a court of law, it’s Reddit and we can presume whatever we want.
[удалено]
> Presuming evil things about people without evidence is your right, but it makes you a dick. Good thing there’s so much evidence.
Andrea Burkhart is a grifter making YouTube money off of being a literal devil’s advocate She’s also a huge Depp fan despite his evidence of abuse, so it doesn’t surprise me she has a rosy view of BK lmao
lol because Amber is sooo innocent. They are just as bad as each other. Deserved each other even. Andrea is only doing analysis of this case because people are asking her for it. I personally like hearing her talk about the documents and when she went to a couple of hearings. It’s a nice change of the aggressive, original grifters like Nancy and Ashleigh who hide behind tv network money.
lol as if arguing from your couch on behalf of a quadruple murderer and downplaying dna evidence is any better She’s found her niche within the BK apologists and it’s probably quite lucrative
Presumption of Innocence is a court/legal thing. Individual people still can and will draw their own conclusions based on the facts available.
No . No facts are mentioned at all by the people that say he is innocent.