Elena

Then that other charge that's very rarely mentioned, that's the leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death charge. I also don't think that was very well proven because to find her guilty of that, the jury would have to find that Karen knew John was injured or killed at the time of this collision and knowingly chose not to help him. And I don't think we saw too much evidence of that.

Again, if a collision did occur, I don't think there's much evidence that Karen knew about it at the time. Now, on the other hand, manslaughter, I think it's a totally different story. I know there's a large group of people who think that the prosecution has nothing and they're expecting, you know, a quick not guilty verdict for manslaughter. And I actually don't agree.

Again, if a collision did occur, I don't think there's much evidence that Karen knew about it at the time. Now, on the other hand, manslaughter, I think it's a totally different story. I know there's a large group of people who think that the prosecution has nothing and they're expecting, you know, a quick not guilty verdict for manslaughter. And I actually don't agree.

Again, if a collision did occur, I don't think there's much evidence that Karen knew about it at the time. Now, on the other hand, manslaughter, I think it's a totally different story. I know there's a large group of people who think that the prosecution has nothing and they're expecting, you know, a quick not guilty verdict for manslaughter. And I actually don't agree.

I might be in the minority here, but I do think the prosecution has presented a decent case for manslaughter. Now, I'm not saying that I personally believe she did it or that the jury should find her guilty. I don't think that at all, actually. But what I'm saying is that I think there's a case here and I think it could go either way, guilty or not guilty.

I might be in the minority here, but I do think the prosecution has presented a decent case for manslaughter. Now, I'm not saying that I personally believe she did it or that the jury should find her guilty. I don't think that at all, actually. But what I'm saying is that I think there's a case here and I think it could go either way, guilty or not guilty.

I might be in the minority here, but I do think the prosecution has presented a decent case for manslaughter. Now, I'm not saying that I personally believe she did it or that the jury should find her guilty. I don't think that at all, actually. But what I'm saying is that I think there's a case here and I think it could go either way, guilty or not guilty.

But I certainly don't think that the deliberation will be quick or a landslide. I think the jury is going to have a lot to consider here. And I think it's going to come down to these fine details, how they weigh the credibility of Aperture versus Arca, How they weigh, say, that taillight evidence against the sketchiness of Proctor.

But I certainly don't think that the deliberation will be quick or a landslide. I think the jury is going to have a lot to consider here. And I think it's going to come down to these fine details, how they weigh the credibility of Aperture versus Arca, How they weigh, say, that taillight evidence against the sketchiness of Proctor.

But I certainly don't think that the deliberation will be quick or a landslide. I think the jury is going to have a lot to consider here. And I think it's going to come down to these fine details, how they weigh the credibility of Aperture versus Arca, How they weigh, say, that taillight evidence against the sketchiness of Proctor.

How they weigh an investigative statement, like, could I have hit him? How do you weigh that against a declarative statement, like, I hit him, I hit him, I hit him? I think all of those things are going to come into play, and I think it's going to be close. Then the defense officially kicked off their case on Friday the 30th.

How they weigh an investigative statement, like, could I have hit him? How do you weigh that against a declarative statement, like, I hit him, I hit him, I hit him? I think all of those things are going to come into play, and I think it's going to be close. Then the defense officially kicked off their case on Friday the 30th.

How they weigh an investigative statement, like, could I have hit him? How do you weigh that against a declarative statement, like, I hit him, I hit him, I hit him? I think all of those things are going to come into play, and I think it's going to be close. Then the defense officially kicked off their case on Friday the 30th.

And they opened with a motion outside of the jury's presence for a required finding of not guilty on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death. And they mentioned some of the same elements that I just talked about, particularly that the Commonwealth didn't seem to show any intent from Karen's part to cause John's death.

And they opened with a motion outside of the jury's presence for a required finding of not guilty on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death. And they mentioned some of the same elements that I just talked about, particularly that the Commonwealth didn't seem to show any intent from Karen's part to cause John's death.

And they opened with a motion outside of the jury's presence for a required finding of not guilty on the charges of second-degree murder and leaving the scene of a collision resulting in death. And they mentioned some of the same elements that I just talked about, particularly that the Commonwealth didn't seem to show any intent from Karen's part to cause John's death.

Now, saying a required finding of not guilty does sound pretty dramatic, but it's actually pretty common for defenses to do, especially in these high-stakes murder cases, and they do it after the prosecution rests, and they do it also knowing that it'll probably be denied, but it keeps the door open for an appeal later down the road.

Now, saying a required finding of not guilty does sound pretty dramatic, but it's actually pretty common for defenses to do, especially in these high-stakes murder cases, and they do it after the prosecution rests, and they do it also knowing that it'll probably be denied, but it keeps the door open for an appeal later down the road.

Now, saying a required finding of not guilty does sound pretty dramatic, but it's actually pretty common for defenses to do, especially in these high-stakes murder cases, and they do it after the prosecution rests, and they do it also knowing that it'll probably be denied, but it keeps the door open for an appeal later down the road.

Now, of course, this was denied, but it was pretty cool to hear Alan Jackson argue why the charges should be dropped because it was kind of like a preview to the points that we can expect to hear during the defense's case and closing arguments.