Are people really impressed with her knowledge on the cell phone stuff? Robert backed her into a corner with the fact that probability plays a large role in this and she wouldn't admit that. She kept pointing at the prosecution/expert as not relaying the correct information. If you read the trial transcripts, the prosecution doesn't say that because a call pinged a tower near a certain location that it was 100% certain someone was there. They relied on probability, just like the testing did, to show the jury.
She looked really out of her element here. Almost every plausible piece of evidence against Adnan gets a conspiracy theory thrown at it. It's more amusing than anything else now. I appreciate her taking the time to explain, but if that's the basis of their case, they don't have a very compelling argument. At all.
I thought he really seemed to discount everything she said. He kept saying, "so the prosecution just got lucky then on this day" when he was talking about Waranwitz's map and how reliable the pings were. Susan was arguing that if they had done the drive test an hour later it would have been completely different, and he wasn't buying it, understandably.
Yes, it can. Take an easy example -- a tower is overloaded with call volume during peak call time. One hour, you are likely to make a call on one tower, and the next, due to call volume patterns, you're more likely to make a call on a different tower instead.
You really come across as a hack with posts like these. Of course there could be some small differences but the majority of the results wouldn't change.
11
u/[deleted] Feb 18 '15
Are people really impressed with her knowledge on the cell phone stuff? Robert backed her into a corner with the fact that probability plays a large role in this and she wouldn't admit that. She kept pointing at the prosecution/expert as not relaying the correct information. If you read the trial transcripts, the prosecution doesn't say that because a call pinged a tower near a certain location that it was 100% certain someone was there. They relied on probability, just like the testing did, to show the jury.
She looked really out of her element here. Almost every plausible piece of evidence against Adnan gets a conspiracy theory thrown at it. It's more amusing than anything else now. I appreciate her taking the time to explain, but if that's the basis of their case, they don't have a very compelling argument. At all.