Dan Epps

Yeah. And I don't really understand NAPU for the reasons I already sort of established. I don't quite understand the prosecutor's duties here, and I don't quite agree with the extra record evidence, but I guess it's been pretty straightforward. On the record, they have, once you get through the procedural violations, given the precedents, the merits seem pretty straightforward.

Yes. Although I will say I found the arguments in, the arguments against the majority made the majority seem stronger to me because it seems like the counter argument is, well, come on, everybody knew he was lying because nobody prescribes lithium for a toothache. That doesn't make any sense. Yeah. That's not a good argument. Yeah. False testimony.

Yes. Although I will say I found the arguments in, the arguments against the majority made the majority seem stronger to me because it seems like the counter argument is, well, come on, everybody knew he was lying because nobody prescribes lithium for a toothache. That doesn't make any sense. Yeah. That's not a good argument. Yeah. False testimony.

Surely there's a due to correct, obviously false testimony. Yeah. And I mean, maybe this is where the Brady claim and the Nipu claim ended up being a little bit of tension. Cause if you want to be able to say, look, he was so obviously lying that the defense already had everything they needed to know to attack this. Then the Nipu claim is ironclad. Yeah.

Surely there's a due to correct, obviously false testimony. Yeah. And I mean, maybe this is where the Brady claim and the Nipu claim ended up being a little bit of tension. Cause if you want to be able to say, look, he was so obviously lying that the defense already had everything they needed to know to attack this. Then the Nipu claim is ironclad. Yeah.

And if you want to say, well, maybe he was telling the truth. Well, then the Brady claim that would have allowed you to get into the truth becomes even more important. Yeah.

And if you want to say, well, maybe he was telling the truth. Well, then the Brady claim that would have allowed you to get into the truth becomes even more important. Yeah.

So mostly I just find it's really, really bizarre that 30 years later, like whether the second capital trial gets a return depends on whether or not somebody wrote in the corner piece of paper, Dr. Trumpet.

So mostly I just find it's really, really bizarre that 30 years later, like whether the second capital trial gets a return depends on whether or not somebody wrote in the corner piece of paper, Dr. Trumpet.

It is kind of wild. And then the other thing is. Turned over box eight a long time ago.

It is kind of wild. And then the other thing is. Turned over box eight a long time ago.

I guess the idea is that that's evidence of the Nipu violation. It's evidence that the prosecution was trying to help Sneed modify his testimony.

I guess the idea is that that's evidence of the Nipu violation. It's evidence that the prosecution was trying to help Sneed modify his testimony.

Did the court ever get into this? There's this old... Also dates back to when we were clicking. There used to be this maybe like 12 to 1 circuit split or something. Yeah. Are there 13 circuits on the cumulative error doctrine?

Did the court ever get into this? There's this old... Also dates back to when we were clicking. There used to be this maybe like 12 to 1 circuit split or something. Yeah. Are there 13 circuits on the cumulative error doctrine?

There was like, if you have one constitutional violation, you're not sure whether that violation is harmful, but in combination with a bunch of other stuff, maybe not independently actionable, then it becomes harmful. And it felt a little bit like that's what the court's doing here.

There was like, if you have one constitutional violation, you're not sure whether that violation is harmful, but in combination with a bunch of other stuff, maybe not independently actionable, then it becomes harmful. And it felt a little bit like that's what the court's doing here.

Well, I don't know. I mean, they say cumulative evaluation. Yeah. Sorry. At the harmless error standard, I guess the prejudice is wrong.

Well, I don't know. I mean, they say cumulative evaluation. Yeah. Sorry. At the harmless error standard, I guess the prejudice is wrong.

So the court now does this thing that I think you and I both disapprove of, where sometimes we'll decide a claim is harmless because there was a bunch of overwhelming evidence, like other evidence. Yes, we shouldn't have admitted this evidence against you, but 12 other people said you did it, so harmless. And I guess if you're going to do that, this is kind of the flip side. It's like...