The Collin County Observer™

A risky move, at best, but it demonstrates the lack of evidence in this politically motivated trial. Hopefully the jury will see that this has been a waste of the taxpayer's money.

What happened on the remainder of Thursday and all of Friday?? Anyone know who testified? What they said?

I do not believe that it is a waste of taxpayer's money to try each of these defendants. It is Patricia Krigger who wasted the taxpayers' money. Day after day, she used the taxes I paid to pay her crew to campaign for her on county time. That is unethical and it is a crime. Each of the defendants should be found guilty. Every taxpayer should be outraged by this behavior in an elected official.

A lack of evidence? They had a recording of one of the defendants on recording discussing how they were hiding it. Not to mention the defense found out their key witness purgered herself to the grand jury. Not sure you kept up with the trial as closely. But you may not mind blowing tax dollars.

Four different defense teams representing four different defendants. All of the defense lawyers involved are top notch, experienced and established litigators with collectively probably close to 80 years plus worth of experience. They know what they're doing. It tells you something if they collectively think the special prosecutor's evidence is so sorely lacking that all of them "rested" without calling witnesses. It remains to be seen whether the jury will see it the same way.

One needs to remember that this "special prosecutor" has already dismissed some indictments and let some former defendants go and then added new defendants (like Hannah Kunkle) into the mix. When I see that, I wonder if this prosecutor got it right the first time or the second time or just hasn't gotten it at all.

I could not disagree more with Old Sarge. "Blue book" or "Hannah Freebies" as they were known were anything but free. It would be a waste of taxpayer money to not stop this practice of giving away time, falsifying records and quite literally wasting tax payer money!

I think it is amazing that Bill chose not to tell what the Texas Ranger admitted to!!! If he can't sensationalize something then he doesn't want to write about it!

Sarge, By your logic, offering no testimony + no witnesses to testify for the defendants = politically motivated trial + lack of evidence. Sounds like a lazy lawyer is representing the defendants. I can't tell - Would you acquit or convict in the court of public opinion?

I agree all of them are top notch, I know two of them but if your witness lied to a grand jury, a good lawyer knows not to try that hand.

Deep in the heart- it was stated that the blue book isn't illegal and the blue book has been running for 20+years so it started way before Patricia started the election. so who really wasted tax payers money? my opinion the ones that started this the Roaches and Duty over what 4 hours and not holding my sign. God be with them. Amen.

A.P. Davidson didn't take any punches from the defense counsel. I know Walpole, and don't know him well or even personally (although he seems VERY smart and nice), but I didn't think it was wise for him to ask A.P. on cross whether he knew the "Girls" were working when they were holding signs at the polling locations. I saw a few sets of juror eyes roll when that question was asked. It seems like a very incredulous argument to make. I sometimes answer a client's text or email at one of my kids' soccer or softball games, but it takes a lot more "work" to constitute working. That argument reminds me of someone saying that they're not a smoker when they're smoking at a bar because they only smoke when they're drinking...at bars.

NOTE TO MR. WALPOLE: I'm just making observational comments, and I'm not intending to "make fun" of you or your client.

I must be missing something. Why was there a trial?

There seemed to be no defense offered up other than 'Don't you like my lawyer?'