i m going to alameda, what you guys doing, hey, paul, you want to go? why is he so busy at making so many calls but doesn t drive the less than a minute down there to see what they re up to. you ve heard t mouth about whether or not maggie was going to go with him to alameda. that alec had actually asked her to come home that night. which he denies. that you saw the text from blanca and you heard from marian that alec wanted maggie to come
he s convincing. what does chris say? the only thing that they talked about is chris being on some case. alec is like hey, i have to go. i m at alameda. did alec say, hey, i m trying to get home. i can t get maggie on the phone. i called her six times. paul won t answer. did alec said call me if you up. did chris say alec said i have to ask a question. let s talk about this. no. chris brought up some case that was mundane. it was mundane. manufacturing an alibi. he s calling anybody that will answer the phone for these short conversations and one of the first things out of his mouth in the first interview. look at my phone. i called this person, i called this person, i called this person. he s manufacturing this alibi. also, throughout all of this,
and then she said alec made an interesting comment, one of many, some that came from the stand that we ll talk about in a little bit. whoever did this thought about it for a really long time. why would he say that. because he told you that it was just random vigilantes from the boat case of which there was no evidence whatsoever, that you have seen in this record. trials depend on evidence. there has to be evidence to make a decision, and his claims trying to manufacture something about the vape case, there s been no evidence whatsoever of any specific other individual. there has to be evidence to consider. not just mere allegations that have no basis in any sort of evidence. whoever did this thought about
she comes forward and collapses as alec is moving and her, firing. they had that expert come in yesterday. i mentioned this, but i ll mention it again. he came in, yesterday, the day before, even i ve lost track of time at this point, but i tried to get out over his skis again and testify to you that it had to be two shooters because there were two guns. why would you not just use the blackout? is that opinion helpful or make sense? knowing what you know about this case and knowing what you know
somebody lifting it up in the normal course. it is not set to respond necessarily to violent motion and flipping it. every expert testified to that. every single one of them did. and then besides that, you d have to accept the fact that alec is driving by just moments prior to that time. all of these circumstances would have to go the other way of a reasonable inference in this case. he got up there and testified as to these issues, and as to the fact that there s no guarantee, in fact, more likely than not that the if the phone is flip a frisbee or whatever, it s not