Brill
SOF Support
Semantics maybe but those were the claims of the investigating officer testifying for the defense - and were not challenged by the prosecution. Does that not make them facts, at least within the context of the trial?
Not unless he's an expert witness who can testify about the state of mind of the accused. Since he ain't there at the time...nope, it's merely conjecture.
Wonder if that is EXACTLY what the prosecution wants?
Intersecting that Big O wants to try terrorists in Federal court but not Fuckface?