I thought it was extremely damaging. I mean, you've got the jury there listening to this doctor that's there for the defense actually admitting and saying that, look, this is not the standard of care that I would have used, and I'm the expert for the defendant.
Paul Henderson, a prosecutor, discusses the damaging testimony of a defense expert in a high-profile case.
Share
More from Paul Henderson
I think the prosecution needed to address race, even if that would not have changed the juror's mind.
Yes. I don't see that coming at this point. With the evidence that's been presented so far, I think the jury, in addition to hearing all of these lapses of judgment... is coming to a place where they can sit in judgment pretty easily and…
Look, here's the thing. And it's very disappointing and challenging. And you know, I believe in the criminal justice system. But I disagree with this verdict.
I like that he elevated the approach and the elevated the observations about stand your ground and asked about at the end of the day what are the outcomes, the measured outcomes associated with stand your ground and really asking everyone…