Originally Posted by
MikeMpls
8 --> 2, eh? Rats desert sinking ship.
Fewer witnesses makes for fewer opportunities for contradictions. I doubt that the other six people could add much to Breedon's and Dilley's testimony. But, who really knows?
Originally Posted by
FliesWay2Much
How is Phil doing? Do he and his attorneys look like they are confident? Did you detect any body language from the jury that might indicate how they viewed the first day of testimony? (Wow! I'm asking you to be a SPOTNik!)
Phil is understandably serious and concerned. He has a lot at stake. His lawyers are terrific. I've second-guessed some of their questioning, but they clearly know what they are doing. The jury is basically inscrutable, so far. Some nodding in response to Nancy Hollander's points.
Originally Posted by
n4zhg
At what point does the persecutor start chanting "9/11...9/11..." at the jury?
He tried! He asked Breedon why the TSA asks for ID. Clearly, he was expecting some explanation about identifying terrorists and people on the no-fly list, etc. Instead, Breedon said, in close to these words: "I don't know why the TSA checks IDs. I just do what they tell me to do." It was quite a moment.
Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
Wondering how large the audience viewing the trial was today?
There may have been 20-25 people in the small courtroom, besides the participants (judge, jury, lawyers, etc.). Many were just curious lawyers with nothing else to do. A few were local sympathizers coming out to support Phil. Many were news media of various types.
Bruce