Personally: no & yes. For the latter, a legitimate court of law ought to laugh at this case. But that’s not what he is facing.
The subject came up in conversation, so I figured I would take the temperature here.
Personally: no & yes. For the latter, a legitimate court of law ought to laugh at this case. But that’s not what he is facing.
The subject came up in conversation, so I figured I would take the temperature here.
Wouldn’t the jury take it at face value that the gun was found on him? The other pieces you mentioned are speculation.
It’s the defence’s job to argue that chain of custody was broken and that the evidence is sketchy at best and sow doubt in its validity. The gun was found in his bag, after the initial search, after the cop had brought the bag to the police station. Not on his person at the time of arrest. There’s definitely reasonable doubt there. That’s a significant piece of evidence that they may be able to paint as unreliable.