Our private investigator, Steve Yonke, who was unequivocally our right-hand man, picked us up outside of the courthouse after the hearing for sanctions ended, and we decided to head to a local drinking establishment to discuss just exactly what had happened in court.

Now, it was clear from the judge's demeanor during the hearing that he seemed inclined to do something extreme,

which in this scenario would be to bar one or all of us from trying the case by not allowing us to be admitted pro hoc v.

We all agreed that Jorgensen did a bang-up job, arguing both the Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice issue as well as the Safe Harbor exception issue, which allows for an attorney to respond in the media in order to offset prejudicial comments made by the other side.

However, in my estimation, the judge seemed to be rejecting the premise using faulty reasoning,

stating that it was the defense that brought the issue to the media, not the state,

wherein in order to reach that conclusion, he had to either choose to completely ignore

or choose to rationalize the fact that the state was leaking information to the media.

Now, we have seen recently in the Brian Kohlberger case how the judge in that case

handled what was clearly a leak of information.

He didn't say, oh, well, leaks happen.

Instead, he put the onus on the state and law enforcement to out who had leaked the information and gave

them both a very strict timeline in which to do so. Throughout the course of this lengthy season,

I have pounded you over the head with example after example of instances of someone from

the government leaking information to the media. They quite literally have been trying Anthony Garcia in the press,

so we absolutely believe that we were well within our rights under the ethical guidelines

to try and even the playing field by discussing new evidence in the case that supported

the theory that someone else may have committed these crimes.

All of that being said,

we had to deal with the stark reality, that the judge was going to be ruling against us. This wasn't a matter of what if damage was going to be done. No, it was a matter of how much damage was

going to be done. While it seems clear that the safe harbor exception is not going to be the concept that Judge

Randall will be willing to hang his hat on, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel issue,

...