Broken Plea Review Pt 5 (Ch 10-12)

Hey y'all, welcome back. I hope y'all are having a great start to your week. I'm back again for the fourth part, fifth part of my review of Christopher Whitcomb's new book, Broken Plea. In the last video, we went through chapter nine, which was the state's timeline. So, we're going to pick back up today on chapter 10. So, let's go

ahead and get started. That's the intro. And chapter 10 is titled Halloween Victimology Terrible Toothache. Chris Whitcomb opens up this chapter with the definition of hearsay. But, on the second page, he makes a good point. He wrote, "Why bring up legal jargon in a case that will not go to trial? Because what

the public has heard about events inside that house early Sunday morning is based on two and a half years of gag order speculation followed by a slow drip of disclosures based on FOIA requests. It is easy to argue now that even Bill Thompson's narrative during Kohberger's change of plea hearing appears to be

rife with possible errors, omissions, and misstatements of fact. News articles, documentaries, and media accounts have sensationalized rumors based on insinuation and leaks. Video recorded witness statements have been summarized in poorly written supplementals. Laboratory findings are buried in reams of statistics and protocols shaping science to fit the prosecution's case." He also said, "It

did not help that highly accomplished lawyers faced off every day for years asking the court to rule on motions in limine predetermining what jurors would be allowed to hear. Even criminologists like Paulette Sutton and Dr. Brent Turvey disagreed standing behind well-educated judgments and certified points of view. Anne Taylor's office seems not to have found it odd that the