>It would do him little good to implicate Jay unless he could
>carry the entire theory out from start to finish with
>compelling evidence. Otherwise it simply would look like
>he’s just trying to finger someone else.
>
>There’s absolutely no merit to the notion that the
>“only” reason for Adnan to choose not to point the finger
>at Jay is that he’s somehow implicated. That’s nothing
>more than deductive reasoning with no real substance behind
>it.
>
>The more logical reason is plainly obvious: there’s no real
>benefit to him unless he can make a significant case.


No. He doesn't have to make a signficant case. He doesn't have to prove anything. All he has to do is create reasonable doubt. He doesn't have to know how he did it. Why he did it or any of the details.

All it would take is point out all the inconsistencies in Jay's stories and point out that Jay had information that only a person involved with the killing would know.


Watch what they do in this retrial. It's going to be all about Jay.


What’s
>the point of offering something with no real benefit that
>could then only due harm to himself? If he points the finger
>at anyone up to and including Jay he’ll have to prove it but
>then that assumes he has the information to do so, which would
>have made all of this mute to begin with, which also means the
>other possibility is that he simply doesn’t have information
>to implicate Jay.
>


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"