Possibly. Were the warrants drawn up correctly and executed legally? You don't know. What evidence will be inadmissible? What exculpatory evidence does the defense have? Again, you don't know.
LOL at your warrants and evidence arguement.
Yeah, we know big shot the Constitution requires that exculpatory statements by criminal defendants be admitted but once he says anything the prosecution has damning evidence to rebut. That's why he's being told non-stop to shut by his criminal defense team and to not write stupid letters to his fan club, lol. He's as dumb as he looks.
Where was he the night of the murder? Why did he hire a maid service? Why did he flee from police? Why did he destroy his security system (recovered evidence)? That spoiliation of admissiable evidence (do you know how to read FRE) is admissable.
You think they honestly didn't have correct documented warrants to enter his house (no brainer here genius check the 4th amend.) A warrantless search or seizure can survive constitutional inhibition by the surrounding facts - fleeing from police is one of them, spoliation of evidence is another. Check the exigent circumsntaces and let us know what you find.
His defense team has an uphill battle the whole way.
His name is on everything, the timeline of events leading up to and after the murder is
spot on placing him as the lead suspect. Just the spoiliation of evidence makes him look culpable before a jury - forget about all the other surrounding circumstantial evidence.
Do you honestly beleive (why am I asking you a question you don't know jack shit) that he has a tight group of friends that are not in or going to be in any legal trouble within the next year and a half to turn state's evidence?
Yeah, so before you try to insult some bros on here for their opinions don't throw legalse around. This is just 2 rules of FRE.
