As the defense counsel I would still argue for the prosecution misconduct because, the prosecutor hired the laboratory to perform the DNA analysis, so the prosecutor should take on the responsible of the laboratory mistakes. In addition, the prosecutor needed to share this information with the defense and failure to do so, is unlawful and fail to act, as for a prosecutor especially when trying to impact the jury to wrongly convict a respondent or to compel a harsher than reasonable order. Furthermore, I would motion for a new trial in reference to these new facts.
A person who's been formally blamed for a wrongdoing is typically qualified for specific sorts of confirmation and data. As a rule, an accuser has a privilege to get this sort of
A person who's been formally blamed for a wrongdoing is typically qualified for specific sorts of confirmation and data. As a rule, an accuser has a privilege to get this sort of