Get ready to dive into the world of mystery and justice without warning

podcast questioning the truth, dissecting the evidence and demanding justice.

In this episode, Tom, you were able to ask Brenda questions about what happened that evening,

and she chose to take the fifth.

Would you have had your client take the fifth?

Is it because she's guilty?

She has to.

She had no choice because there's no statute of limitations

for murder in Texas so that if she waived her right to assert the

Fifth Amendment, then she opens herself up to criminal prosecution.

Now, she attempted to do that initially.

She started to give an answer about wanting to talk to Pam, but I didn't want her to not take the

fifth because strategically I thought it would be more beneficial for her taking

the fifth in front of the jury than explaining away and additionally I'd taken her deposition and she hadn't told any story. So it may not have been to the advantage of the cause to have her selectively take the fifth.

I didn't want her currying any sympathy by sitting at the party's table there next to us crying or attempting in some way to Curry Sympathy from the jury. I felt like if she took the

fifth in my questioning as the first witness that it would totally turn the jury off and that the jury

would not be interested in anything she said or did thereafter.

I didn't think she was capable of currying favor

after she took the Fifth Amendment.

The issue about whether or not I could cross-examine

Brenda Lazaro right away is one that I and

I asked her completely, completely leading questions and normally in that situation you have asked the judge

...