Justthefacts
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,072
- Points
- 0
My only concern re the missing iv is if u have a jurror thats of the opinion that if u cant physically produce the missing i.v line then im abit concerend about saying yes this is what happened. of course theres lots of other evidence that supports the iv been used and u have the testimony of murray hiding other evidence so its certainly believable that murray took the iv line. but u just try to look at all angles cause u can see the defence doing an oj interms of the glove not fitting ie there was no iv line found
In OJ's case the glove literally did not fit. In this case you have one side saying that there was a drip however there is no line. You have the other side saying that the guy self injected but there are no prints on the bottles or anything for that matter. I think boil down two what story makes the most sense and is most likely to have happened and what makes the most sense