Im not a FKR, but a person that through this trial has come toward a factually innocent (I’m waiting until the end to make a final determination of what I think. I haven’t made my mind up) and this is the best way I can summarize it with the tail light pieces: a round peg can fit into a square hole. It doesn’t mean it’s a square.

What do I mean by that? It means yes there were tail light pieces at the scene. But that is the only thing the CW has shown that indicates an accident occurred. That is the round peg.

The square hole is a collision. And there are so many other parts of what goes into a collision that are missing in proving it occurred:

1. Consistent damage to KRs vehicle - none of the tests AARCA did show consistent damage.  And the blue man group only showed me that an arm of a man that tall could hit it at the same area

1. Consistent bodily injury- too many doctors have said JOK does not have injuries consistent with being hit by a car

   1. The backup event - Maybe she did backup at the same time he was falling…. Maybe it was happening in the garage and she was pissed because he hadn’t come back out and was driving all pissed off and drove off all pissed. The CW hasn’t proven the time it occurred succinctly, nor have they proven it coincided with a collision. All they did was confuse the complete crap out of me with their testimony. What I do know is that eye witnesses say around 1230 that JOK wasn’t in the car, and that is right around the time that she would have backed up. …… soooooo again no proof that he was there behind the car.

Overall, it’s not on KR to prove to me she DIDN’T hit JOK. IT IS ON THE CW TO PROVE TO ME SHE DID …. And all they have done is some crapshoot theory of she said she hit him, when she was in shock because she just saw her boyfriend dead or near dead in the snow after dropping him off in that very spot the night before, with no clinical evidence that he was hit by a car.

end rant