Re: **** tha police

In article <h5b91494lh6pst9ck6ep1jm9l03903t2db@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Les Albert
<lalbert1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

[snip-speculation on what the prosecutor was thinking]
>
>The grand jury testimony elicited, "... the detectives accounts of the
>panic and uncertainty surrounding the shooting coming across ...". The
>quote is one that I posted earlier from the New York Times account of
>the trial.  The grand jury questioner (the prosecutor in the trial)
>was able to elicit that uncertainty, and he would have been able to
>bring it out in a more realistic fa****on (direct confrontation in the
>court room) if he hadn't allowed the grand jury testimony to be read
>into the record.  The prosecutor screwed up; whether or not it was
>intentional is something that we will never know.  
>

Thanks, that's what I was pointing out when I started this. If there's an
L&O episode, they'll have collusion, maybe.

-- 
cahrles