Rochelle Keyhan

I need to bring as much evidence as possible to win this case, but I want that verdict to last, not just be two years and then overturned. Right. So I don't think that this evidence is 100 percent not coming in because what it also did was put defense on notice. Like we have these witnesses that can say this stuff. Sure. At this moment, trial hasn't started.

I need to bring as much evidence as possible to win this case, but I want that verdict to last, not just be two years and then overturned. Right. So I don't think that this evidence is 100 percent not coming in because what it also did was put defense on notice. Like we have these witnesses that can say this stuff. Sure. At this moment, trial hasn't started.

The judge doesn't know what's going to be said. So they're not allowed. But it makes defense have to sort of walk a tightrope to not open the door for the prosecution then to re-argue this and say, look, it's admissible now. Like, you have to let us bring these witnesses in. So it kind of also ties the hands of defense a little bit, even if they lost the motion at the moment.

The judge doesn't know what's going to be said. So they're not allowed. But it makes defense have to sort of walk a tightrope to not open the door for the prosecution then to re-argue this and say, look, it's admissible now. Like, you have to let us bring these witnesses in. So it kind of also ties the hands of defense a little bit, even if they lost the motion at the moment.

So hopefully it's not a full-on windfall for them.

So hopefully it's not a full-on windfall for them.

Yeah, if something changes, absolutely. So defense could just make the wrong argument and prosecution is just waiting for it to be like, okay, Your Honor, we have to argue motions.

Yeah, if something changes, absolutely. So defense could just make the wrong argument and prosecution is just waiting for it to be like, okay, Your Honor, we have to argue motions.

Absolutely. I think that's probably partially why the judge was weighing things, right? Because it's always more inflammatory when these types of abuse happens to a minor. Personally, for me, I feel like it's inflammatory regardless of age, but I definitely know having tried juries, the horror... is higher the younger the victim is. It's absolutely something that the defense needs to be weary of.

Absolutely. I think that's probably partially why the judge was weighing things, right? Because it's always more inflammatory when these types of abuse happens to a minor. Personally, for me, I feel like it's inflammatory regardless of age, but I definitely know having tried juries, the horror... is higher the younger the victim is. It's absolutely something that the defense needs to be weary of.

I think also it makes me wonder why prosecution didn't charge sexual assault, because then all of these probably would have come in as other acts, or they could have charged it, because then it would be directly relevant to his history of coercive sex. And that minor would have made potentially a big difference.

I think also it makes me wonder why prosecution didn't charge sexual assault, because then all of these probably would have come in as other acts, or they could have charged it, because then it would be directly relevant to his history of coercive sex. And that minor would have made potentially a big difference.

So I wonder if part of it's also just strategy on prosecution where they want to be able to focus on a specific type of behavior and not have to have a whole separate trial on something different. Because if they were arguing sexual assault separately and having that minor as part of the main case, it might distract from or confuse the

So I wonder if part of it's also just strategy on prosecution where they want to be able to focus on a specific type of behavior and not have to have a whole separate trial on something different. Because if they were arguing sexual assault separately and having that minor as part of the main case, it might distract from or confuse the

what they're arguing on trafficking and RICO, which are really already pretty complex concepts to communicate to a lay jury.

what they're arguing on trafficking and RICO, which are really already pretty complex concepts to communicate to a lay jury.

I don't know that you really can prep a victim for what what they're going to experience. It's it's kind of impossible because not only are they having to get up there and relive it in front of people and then be like torn apart by someone in front of a bunch of strangers, it's in front of the guy that did it, right? So you can only prep them as much as possible.

I don't know that you really can prep a victim for what what they're going to experience. It's it's kind of impossible because not only are they having to get up there and relive it in front of people and then be like torn apart by someone in front of a bunch of strangers, it's in front of the guy that did it, right? So you can only prep them as much as possible.

I think one interesting thing is if any of them are at the point where it would be healing to say it all out loud and they're at the healing stage where they know it's not their shame, it's his, which I'm feeling like might be where Cassie is coming from. Cause she was like, no, I'm going to say it by my name.

I think one interesting thing is if any of them are at the point where it would be healing to say it all out loud and they're at the healing stage where they know it's not their shame, it's his, which I'm feeling like might be where Cassie is coming from. Cause she was like, no, I'm going to say it by my name.