test
I've been trying to understand what's going on with the different Durham trials…
Not a lawfag…but it seems with each of these trials we get testimony/evidence that helps define the crimes committed. So…are these Durham trials introducing the evidence in these "small fish" trials so that when they try the "Big Fish" … the evidence has already been introduced?
As another old anon says…just spitballing here…
From post 3850
How do you introduce evidence legally?
>Any charges have to be made before the applicable statute of limitations has run, or the statute has to be tolled by some other action. They don't have forever to bring charges, especially as the event was, what, 6-7 years ago.
If the charges are made in sealed indictments…does that get us around the statute of limitations?
Thanks anons…
TesTicle