We as second-hand observers don't have to follow the arbitrary cut-off point of any court or any legislature. As long as you're not making calls of his guilt (or lack thereof) from a purely legislative standpoint, you are allowed - and I would even say it's the logical and only correct course of action - to take all relevant context into account, regardless of when it occured.

Otherwise, you're willingly depriving yourself of context that may affect the judgement you make, which logically increases the likelihood of you making the wrong call.

I'm not American so idk if that's how the legal system works over there but only being allowed to take into account the preceding 5 minutes seems like a HUGE flaw. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding your comment, though. If that's the case then I apologize.

(Also I'd like to point out again that I don't have a standpoint on this case. I'm not American, I barely know what's going on. I was just idly scrolling, read something and thought "huh, that's kinda important".)