Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz
For Oski, understanding the transcripts is so easy that he didn't even need to read them.
I have not read the transcripts and yet, I know more about the case than you do.
Weird how that works.
Because you don't understand the transcripts , you have actually decreased you knowledge of the case.
For example, not understanding the difference between an expert opinion and percipient testony has substantially muddled your brain.
If you need a good example of how to work with source materials, look at 5ive's treatment of the BD interrogations. He demonstrates an ability to analyze the material as opposed to you, who just parrots back excerpts of testimony without understanding anything about it.