Anything, say, slightly more specific?
Yeah.
All three cases, he tells the jury the biggest asset to the defense is their common sense.
Verbatim, all three openings, he says:
"More than all our expert testimony, more than all our unconvoluted..."
I'm sorry. "...uncontroverted evidence what the defense is going for, more than anything else, is your common sense the seat-of-the-pants wisdom of the reasonable person."
That's good.
What else?
Well, he goes on a lot about free society, personal choice.
You know, we're America.
People make their own decisions.
Red, white and blue.
Then, you know, the usual.
He goes over his high school field-hockey record.
You're all such a big riot.
- I'd say she's feeling some pressure.
- Some.
I just don't understand.
He tried to kill another girl.
This directly contradicts his insanity story.
How can the judge not let the jury hear this?
It's too prejudicial.
Like he said, it would guarantee the guy a new trial.
{'source': 'opensubtitles', 'link': 'https://opus.nlpl.eu/OpenSubtitles.php', 'starting_line': 3781857, 'ending_line': 3781880}