May I clarify? My post did not reflect on the substance of the trial, the evidence, whether or not guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
I would judge the testimony of Spitz based on his credentials and the substance of his testimony, not because he was involved in the Kennedy and MLK cases.
OR SPITZ ridiculous testimony in the OJ SIMPSON CASE!!!
I didn’t see it but apparently he was a real LOSER in the Phil Spector Case too.
Obviously he has long passed his prime.
LOL - see, that is where is it easy to go wrong on FR - I thought you were describing MY testimony, not that of Spitz.
You can see how I was annoyed.
Apologies.