Here is one example but there are others. In one of Trump's cases the judge wanted to know the witnesses the defence was going to bring and the questions he would be asked. Any witnesses or questions the judge did not like were banned.
Same with the law in the Tina Peters' case. I am not a lawyer so this might not be 100% but I believe there is law that says that people who are investigating election discrepancies are allowed to ignore certain other laws but the jury was not allowed to hear that.
This trial seems to follow the way the various Trump trials have been conducted. The template is:
How the hell do they get away with refusing to present exculpatory evidence?
Here is one example but there are others. In one of Trump's cases the judge wanted to know the witnesses the defence was going to bring and the questions he would be asked. Any witnesses or questions the judge did not like were banned.
Same with the law in the Tina Peters' case. I am not a lawyer so this might not be 100% but I believe there is law that says that people who are investigating election discrepancies are allowed to ignore certain other laws but the jury was not allowed to hear that.
Another step closer to dentures.