as for the so-called jackpot evidence, the cash purchase of the nike sneakers and baseball bat and gloves, who knows who bought those, said the defense, but it wasn t ernie. anyway, those nike sneakers were a size 12 and ernie wore a 9 1/2 or 10. proves he didn t do it, right? and on that point the prosecution had only this. he is very proficient at misinformation and disinformation, and i think that he intentionally bought shoes that were too large for him. ernie scherer took the stand himself, sat up there for the better part of seven days, confident, often smiling, and claiming it was his lifestyle the prosecution put on trial. he s a human. he made mistakes like everybody else does. that doesn t make him a monster. would he convince the jury? i think it goes back to him thinking i m at a table and there s all kinds of chips on the middle of the table.
just a mistake, contamination. but did it point to the real killer? as for the so-called jackpot evidence, the cash purchase of the nike sneakers and baseball bat and gloves, who knows who bought those, said the defense, but it wasn t ernie. anyway, those nike sneakers were a size 12 and ernie wore a 9 1/2 or 10. proves he didn t do it, right? and on that point the prosecution had only this. he is very proficient at misinformation and disinformation, and i think that he intentionally bought shoes that were too large for him. ernie scherer took the stand himself, sat up there for the better part of seven days, confident, often smiling, and claiming it was his lifestyle the prosecution put on trial. he s a human. he made mistakes like everybody else does. that doesn t make him a monster. would he convince the jury? i think it goes back to him thinking i m at a table and
as for the so-called jackpot evidence, the cash purchase of the nike sneakers and baseball bat and gloves. who knows? but wasn t ernie. anyway, they were a size 12. that proves he didn t do it, right? and the prosecution had only this. he is very proficient. i think he intentionally bought he it. confidence, smiling, and claiming it was lifestyle. he made mistakes like everybody els. i m at a table and there is
killer? as for the jackpot evidence, the cash purchase of the nike sneakers and baseball bat and gloves? who knows who bought those, said the defense, but it wasn t ernie. those nike sneakers were a size 12 and ernie wore a 9 1/2 or 10. proves he didn t do it, right? and on that point, the prosecution had only this. he is very proficient at misinformation and disinformation. and i think that he intentionally bought shoes that were too large for him. reporter: ernie took the stand himself. sat out there for the better part of seven days, confident, often smiling and claiming it was his lifestyle the prosecution put on trial. he s human. he made mistakes like everybody else does. that doesn t make him a monster. would he convince the jury? i think it goes back to him thinking, i m at a table and there s all kinds of chips on
red chevy camaro, the dead cell phone around the time of the murders, asking his friends to buy a gun, all of that could have been simply coincidence. it could be explained away. and, besides, said the defense, there was actual physical evidence to prove someone other than ernie committed the crime, that speck of unidentified dna found in one of those bloody shoeprints at the crime scene. the prosecution argued it was just a mistake, contamination. but did it point to the real killer? as for the so-called jackpot evidence, the cash purchase of the nike sneakers and baseball bat and gloves? who knows who bought those, said the defense, but it wasn t ernie. anyway, those nike sneakers were