Look like the police have a few people to pick

[Bricktop]

hold on...if the handwriting expert says Chow wrote the letter...the State does not offer their own expert to challenge the authenticity...Chow says he didn't write the letter...there is only one logical inference that can be drawn...

[Gamma]

That is a fallacy.....the expert says 99% probability ... There is a 1% room for error. Man says he did not write it and is 100% sure of thathe jury believes him, because there is no probability in that once they find his evidence credible.

On another note, why would Gaza Slim claim seh Lizard hold up and rob her if he did not?

[Bricktop]

the man had a gun charge that disappeared...that is more than enough impetus to say he didn't write the letter...aks Gaza Skim dat...not relevant to the case as was not introduced into evidence

[Mosiah]

Like I said, I want the truth.

I got it!

[Bricktop]

you got what you wanted to get...your truth

[Gamma]

i thought you said his motive was not important? you are now imputing one. as i asaid do some research on expert testimony and the value of expert testimony as well as the terminology "with a reasonable degree of certanty". the experts evidence does not have to be refuted it can be accepted for what it is, an eductaed or scientific guess.

i said the gaza slim thing was on another note but it confirms in my mind that the jury did the right thing in the way it evaluated those pieces of evidence, letter expert testimony, the information on the telephone and the other big boo boo by the defence, allowing kartel to speak.

[Bricktop]

so why did you pose the question? is it common practice for the State not to call their own expert to refute Defence expert testimony? the defence expert was good enough for the State to use him in October to convict a police officer of murder...whappen him lose a step since then?

[Jangle]

wooiiiee mi claustrophobia!!

[Gamma]

i posed the question because it IS relevant. first you said it wasn't and now you seem to think it is ... a bit of a flip flop but you came around where that is concerned so no worries there.

calling an expert is a matter of strategy .... the prosecution may have decided not to call an expert because they felt that the evidence of the witness "i did not write it" was credible enough to rebut the "99% degree of reasonable certainty" because there is that 1% wiggle room. in other words that expert witness could never have said with 100% certainty that Chow wrote the letter. the prosecution expertly exploited that IMHO and with the appropriate instructions to the jury as to the value of expert testimony they were able make their case. is not every time the other side call an expert witness you should run for one of your own. strategy 201 (not for beginners). jeremy taylor was very good in this case. maybe ttf underestimated him, who knows.

why didn't kartel take the stand to give evidence that would exonerate him? he could if he wanted to and tell the whole story and establish his alibi and all of that?

[Bricktop]

how can it not be relevant that the State's key witness has a gun charge against him vanish in return for his testimony in a murder trial? 99% was the sole reason a police officer was sent to prison for life in October...what changed?

[Gamma]

a you must tell me why yuh never considered it relevant, it was always relevant! btw do you think that he would need to be in the witness protection programme for giving evidence?

the 99% is always a rebuttable presumption i don't know about the other case but in this case it was rebutted (i did not write it) by what the jury considered to be credible evidence. the rebuttable can come by way oof cross examination, another more qualified or highly regarded expert or just plain old everyday testimony and evidence.

[Bricktop]

show me what you are referring to...what did i say was not relevant? this just goes to show the weight assigned by the jurors to the evidence taken from the phone...the evidence that the cyber expert said could not be verified as being accurate as it was accessed by unauthorized persons in the JCF...we will see what the law gods have to say about it

[Gamma]

Chow is a witness not a defendant...it is irrelevant what benefits he would or would not gain from writing the letter

[Don1]

you got what you wanted to get...your truth

An yuh an yuh muderah hero get whe di duck get