I meant caution, more generally.
And yes, it seems that a decent lawyer was affordable here, though even a hack could hardly miss.
There remain too many DAs going for a 100% conviction record, a similar mindset to that of the of young/arrogant MDs who make racing games of their 'operations', like any callow teen.
A trial is not supposed to be reduced to dueling/inflated egos. But nearly always is. It's an insoluble conundrum, I expect.
Appeals have their own aberrant mythos, though--I remain as skeptical of the pseudo-science of Law as of Econ.
Digital-think can fubar anything, if adults are not mediating. Of course there are +s here too; I just prefer to stay-away, where I have any choice.
(Now you likely need a Perl script, even to parse the automated evidence VS Statutes/cases that made *your* dBase.)
Shall 'justice' finally be doled out on a Turing-complete machine, via Boolean? It'd be efficient as All (of) Hell.
We already have test-trials for jury massaging, for My Case 1.0 (if you have the $$$) What Can you do with 300M occasional-perps to discipline, eh?