We can immediately see that the specific facts of the case have not been repeated. They have been used as reference points in the argument. There may be further facts that should be argued that show that the defendant’s reconstruction expert is wrong, that he is a hired charlatan—whatever the evidence may be in that regard, but always, the facts are but ammunition for the argument and are never to be recounted in the form of witness summaries. But throughout the argument the tone will reflect our sense of ethical anger, and honestly delivered, our argument will infect the jury and create in
...more
