Defending his client

[0:23]" Well are can -- right now is there we go again. As the evidence unfolds in the print and electronic media. You know it seems to me that the evidence already seems to be overwhelmingly. In favor of the prosecution. In the seems to point to the deal to -- Mr. Markoff. You know all I can think the society is that pretrial prejudicial publicity. And is often. The bane of trial lawyers. We have to keep in mind the presumption of innocence even though in this particular cases seems to me. That people are going to have a very difficult time because of the release of information. Two in the media about the evidence against him. I think. That probably we may in this country come to realize that the English law maybe preferential -- is that. On the penalties. Criminal sanctions. The media may not release information about a pending criminal case I mean after it happened in this country. How -- sure that the evidence seems to be overwhelming."

[2:22]" Okay but that look at -- and that's about obviously a very important point but let's set that aside just for moment. And they just make this purely hypothetical. If you can establish motive and opportunity by virtue of the fact that the person is is there you -- that -- Billiton DNA. Evidence if the ballistics proved that the gun found in a hollowed out book in his apartment was the weapon used and if the undergarments found there are linked by DNA to the victims. What possible defense the health."

[2:53]" The -- that first degree murder is that taking every human life after premeditation. And malice aforethought. That's what has certainly proven beyond a reasonable doubt and in Massachusetts to -- moral certainty. So I suppose. Looking ahead. If that use the evidence and none of us -- sure that is except leads by yeah. Law enforcement officials is that is the evidence -- seems to be overwhelming sufficient to convince a jury and I suppose the only. Possible. Defense that I can think visit dispose of unsound mind that insanity maybe the difference I don't know I I just don't know at this point. And I think that is dangerous to speculate about what a difference might be we just don't."

[4:12]" The burden is upon the commonwealth once raised by the defense the gruden and becomes of the commonwealth burden to show that he was not. Under the influence of insanity that it was not the productivity of the acts. Or acts were not products. And is sane mind. I'm so. But you know that that's that's the again the battle of the experts which may take place in this case the commonwealth has a right to have this -- examined. By their own psychiatrist. In order to -- they've -- burden of proof which it has in order to show that he has. The requisite. Knowledge of right and wrong in order to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt."

[5:00]" And and even if any of us -- over twenty years old certainly remembers. The state of California against OJ Simpson word appeared dead heat they had him dead to rights and he walked."

[5:13]" And of course and there are many who. Comment about that as to whether or not he was guilty and and everyone in the world. That but I certainly spoken to is convinced of fact about the -- he did in fact commit the crimes but. As a matter of law. Was a proven beyond a reasonable government courtroom and those who followed a carefully divided. What would say you know probably not. Probably the government and meditate failed. In the same -- botched and presentation of evidence. In order to show beyond a reasonable onto a moral certainty that Georgia's and to commit that crime at least that's my view."