Blaine Alexander

Is this reasonable?

Does this make any sense at all?

He thought the poisoning evidence was weak.

Remember, Jake's body had been cremated quickly and there was no autopsy, so it was all based on the hairs found in Jake's brush, collected by Jake's daughter.

The first part is you have to ask, was there a chain of custody on the hair, right?

And there wasn't.

It wasn't gathered by the police or anything like that.

And the lab that detected pesticides and antifreeze had its license suspended after accusations of misconduct.

So you're saying that evidence should have been nowhere near the first trial.

Because it wasn't evidence.

It was just fantasy.

And it was just absurd.

The idea that she's poisoning him with DEET, like she's spraying insect repellent on the food for years.

And you're saying that's just not reasonable.

I'm saying that's not reasonable.

That's not realistic.

Just weeks before the trial began, the defense asked the court to drop the poisoning charge and exclude all evidence of poisoning from the trial.

The judge agreed, a major victory for the defense.

So this time around, poisoning wasn't even supposed to be mentioned.

Yes.