With neither case the phrase wasn't used in judge's instructions to the juries. Prosecutorial statements often include irrelevant statements that wouldn't be countered during other aspects of a trial. I rarely pay attention to summations, they don't accomplish much. The case has been already made or not. Most cases are rather mundane, open and shut, jockeying between prosecutors and defense attorneys for the most/least punishment for the guilty. TKO's by technicalities. A working judge told me he recently sat through hours of argument by a young DA and a young defense atty over whether or not the jury could see a gun register. Both reiterated their arguments in closing statements. The judge couldn't determine why it was an issue, the weapon in question had been reported stolen more than 12 years previously. After the trial he learned the defense atty thought the register was a ballistics report, and so did the ADA. There was no ballistics report, the round used had shattered.
I'm a former gold shield with 15 years working for the NYPD, after a stint as a US Army MP. A retired owner of a self built A class personal security company. I've testified and sat through 100's of criminal hearings and trials. As well, I've been a back room local politician, never running for office, but supporting many for business purposes. Attorney referrals were my major source of business. Political clubs are composed of mostly attorneys. I've belonged to the same social club for 48 years, other members being mostly retired police, lawyers, judges, bankers, aka known as cheap SOB's. Most of us grew up together. The usual conversations are women, families, poker, ongoing trials, local politics, and more poker. They all cheat at poker. I cheat at poker also. The club is all men, no women want to join, they've been guests to annual Valentine's dinners and dances, and they barely tolerate those. One woman attorney sued us years back, thinking it was a place to do business and she was cut out of the deal making. Sometimes lawyer members will cut deals at the club, but no different than they'd cut with any other attorney with a phone call. ~~SNIP~~
Every jurisdiction is different. In addition to codified rules, regulations, remedies and legal definitions, there are customs, traditions, with different judges having their own tolerances. Most American Law is based on English common law, with states like Louisiana and Alabama on the Napoleonic code. Earlier French law in counties bordering Canada, Spanish law in the SW and southern California, and Portuguese law in parts of Maine and Massachusetts (don't ask).There are jurisdictions that follow the logic of Harvard Law School, others that follow Yale, and others different philosophies and linguistic from other schools of thought. Ambiguity of law is everything. Similar circumstances can bring entirely results in the same court, depending on the sitting judge, composition of juries, the argumentative skills of opposing attorneys.
~~~SNIP~~~ That's what is going on with these cases. There isn't question of guilt, only punishment. Mueller has got it wrong, he still thinks he can milk these clowns for info. Neither has any credulity. Doesn't matter what they have to say.
Especially when I wasn't there, don't know what she is talking about, and I know she's lying, picking a fight to cover something she did.
