Yep, I heard that, too. What the hell is going on. DHS couldn't provide a report because it was made UP and yet these men are put in danger......WTFFFFFF???
The couldn't provide a report because they can't provide the report. THe evidence in the case is independent of investigative reports about the investigations that turned up the evidence.
Don't be deceived by the shell game and misdirection. Whether some DHS guy mis-spoke about what pieces of paper they had in their possession is not germane to what evidence was presented in the court.
We need to get the trial transcript so we can see what was said, what evidence was presented. Then we can 2nd-guess the jury.
It's funny how the defenders latch onto 3 jurors who voted to convict on 14 counts, but later claimed they were pressured into a unanimous verdict on some of those (which is common practice in a jury room, the judge DOES exert pressure to try to get the jury to reach verdicts on all counts). But even if you believe the 3 jurors are telling the truth now, 9 other jurors are completely convinced the guys are guilty, after hearing evidence presented in court by both the prosecution AND the defense team, in the presence of an impartial judge.
It can hardly be a slam-dunk travesty of justice for these men to be convicted when 9 of 12 people hearing the evidence are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty.
Unless of course it can be shown that evidence presented AT the case was false. There has been no proof offered yet for false testimony or manufactured evidence being presented at trial. There are claims by the agents that other agents lied, but of course that is not proof, because the agents could be lying.