Replies

During 30 minutes of cross-examination, Val Wachtel, Reginald Carr's lawyer, pointed out inconsistencies in the woman's previous statements.

Laying the groundwork for 11-1 or 10-2 jury nullification?

From todays Topeka Capital-Journal/AP article:

The courtroom identification was a major setback for the defense of Reginald Carr because the woman had been able to identify only his brother during a preliminary hearing last year.
She told jurors she had been unable at that time to identify Reginald Carr because he had changed his appearance since the attacks. He had shaved his head and intermittently wore glasses at the hearing.

Reginald Carr before and after:

That's not jury nullification. That would be a hung jury. In that case, they could be re-tried. Jury nullification is most often used in when the defendant's are sympathetic. (e.g. husband kills man who raped wife while man is on trial -- husband is charged with murder. Defense will try to use facts to get jury to ignore the law and set free the husband).

Here, it sounds like the defense's theory is simple. Man, this was one horrible crime. And so many horrible things happened to this woman and her friends, but the truth is she can't really be sure that it was my client. And while we may want someone to pay, we want the right person to pay, otherwise this tragedy is made worse.

Defense will use the inconsistencies to draw reasonable doubt. At the end of the day, failing to make a positive ID of the suspect could be fatal. It sounds, however, like she rehabilitated herself and made that ID.

This is one of the most horrifying crimes I have ever heard of.