By simply questioning the vague nature of an oft repeated line about future trials? The OP posted nonsense from a legal perspective about evidence being admitted and useful going forward? Lol what? Evidence is evidence. It’s use in this trial means nothing. It could still be inadmissible in another case. Likewise, evidence deemed inadmissible for this case might be admissible in another. Evidence is evidence. It exists or it doesn’t.
You sound like everybody's working collectively to satisfy you personally and you don't really know what's going on.
By simply questioning the vague nature of an oft repeated line about future trials? The OP posted nonsense from a legal perspective about evidence being admitted and useful going forward? Lol what? Evidence is evidence. It’s use in this trial means nothing. It could still be inadmissible in another case. Likewise, evidence deemed inadmissible for this case might be admissible in another. Evidence is evidence. It exists or it doesn’t.