Yeah, that’s the idea. This hearing was not the murder trial, so evidence pertaining to guilt or innocence is unlikely to have been discussed since it was not relevant to the matter at hand.
Which, as you said, means we have to wait for the trial to know anything conclusively. But the fact that he only disputed the cash does not necessarily mean he is admitting to the rest of it.
Even this explanation may be extrapolating too heavily. I think we’re going to have to wait for the trial to really see what happened
Yeah, that’s the idea. This hearing was not the murder trial, so evidence pertaining to guilt or innocence is unlikely to have been discussed since it was not relevant to the matter at hand.
Which, as you said, means we have to wait for the trial to know anything conclusively. But the fact that he only disputed the cash does not necessarily mean he is admitting to the rest of it.
Yeah im just saying i’ve seen this come up like 50 times now im just repeating what i heard