Lindsay, whatever you do, don't tell them you said "you first" to the serial killer before you shot him. Remember, don't say it!!! Lindsay's reply: I know, I KNOW! I know what I said before and I won't give them any ammunition by using my words against me! You worry about your own testimony - I KNOW WHAT TO SAY! And gee, what do you know, she says the most damaging thing she could - and on the stand, no less.

And do they introduce evidence of just how dangerous the guy was without a weapon? No. They just said in closing that he needed to be muzzled and tied. Any mention of him practically biting off the nose of his prior attorney? (Whom he didn't even bother to threaten and presumably liked) No. Why would they? That would have been realistic. How about calling other witnesses from the civil commitment trial who heard the threats and fixation he had on Lindsay? Nope. Again, too realistic. How about testimony that her voice on the tape was in fact shaky and stressed - she didn't sound calm to me at all. Or how about explaining to the jury that while Bobby didn't tell the police operator about the shooter, that was because he was in shock, too. His instinct was to not shoot off at the mouth. If I were on a jury, I'd think that was plausible. How about redirect to the doctor who testified about battered women's syndrome to counteract the statistics of "more murderers than battered women" have amnesia after? Nope - let's leave the jury with the word "murder" on their mind after hearing from our own witness. After all, it never helps to have an expert clarify that in their expert opinion this case was one of a battered woman and not a cold calculated murder. :rolleyes:

Also, Bobby is WAY too good of an attorney and he loves Lindsay far too much to have made such horrible mistakes on the witness stand. He came off like he was hiding something. And except for the one statement Lindsay made he was telling the truth. His passion when speaking on behalf of his clients would have naturally come out here for his wife, but no, of course he messed up. Otherwise there would have been very little excuse for the guilty verdict - and it's so thin as it is. Please. No jury would have convicted her for first degree murder. At worst it would have been manslaughter, and if the DA didn't include that count or any other lesser included offenses as alternative verdict choices, then she would have been acquitted. I mean good lord - they expect me to believe that last week a jury was stupid enough to vote a mass murdering psychopathic cannibal not guilty (and not by reason of insanity - a straight not guilty, yeah right) and then this week convict Lindsay of first degree murder? Please. How stupid do they think juries are? And how stupid do they think their audience is?

either Lindsay would be found guilty as "cliffhanger" (like they won't get it overturned in the first 3 episodes of next season) or they would leave the verdict itself as the cliffhanger and the jury would reach the logical conclusion and acquit. Frankly I thought a guilty verdict far more likely because the quality of writing has declined so drastically, and because Bobby was found innocent last year. God forbid they repeat themselves.

guilty.