- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 65,981
- Reaction score
- 23,408
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Sure it was.
And it is part and parcel of things that Prosecutors get away with all the time.
So there is no sense complaining about it. It is done. They get away with it.
Can't change it.
Drive on.
And while trying to prevent Sharon from trying to derail, is noble, she will just continue to do so because she can not see her actions as wrong.
So it is pretty much a fruitless endeavor.
The best thing to do is point out her attempt at derailing, and continue on topic.
The defense could use the action of the prosecutor in many ways, including naming the prosecutor as a witness in the case, thereby disqualifying her. I think an assertion could be made that the truthfulness of prosecution witnesses could be challenged because professionals who did not say what the prosecution wanted were fired or demoted and the prosecutor repeatedly has openly demonstrated that illegal conduct on behalf of the prosecution is expects and protected by the prosecutor - including by her demonstrating she herself can openly violate law, thus IF for the prosecution witnesses are free to - and even expected to - commit perjury for the prosecution's case.
Jurors do tend to balk when the think the prosecution is being unfair or fixated on doing anything even illegal or illegitimate to get a defendant.