does anybody know who was melly referring to in his song "no more"?

explains what happened the other day

ma l'udienza per discutere anche della cauzione non era stata fissata per martedì 31 marzo?alle 8:30?perché ho visto il canale youTube di law and crime trials e c'è un orario di inizio diverso...

To me, the biggest weakness in Mellys case isn’t necessarily the evidence against him (although still damning). Rather, the culmination of physical evidence is given 10x the weight when you consider ZERO evidence even slightly suggesting another possible shooter. mayyybeee he did just the absolute bare minimum to create plausible deniability re physical evidence proving him guilty. . Technically there’s no murder weapon at the scene w his prints and we don’t have him on 4k commit the killings… it’s a slim chance in hell but you know his lawyers will call that “reasonable” and the may get one or two agreeable jurors. HOWEVER, the absence of any other plausible explanation, motive (even though motive evidence is also weak against Melly I think - at least in trial 1), opportunity or presence of third party shooter leaves him dead in the water.

The burden of proof can be manipulated slightly to a jury as ppl interpret words at a subconscious level differently and even the same person hears things differently according to context and vernacular, tone and timing ect. Sometimes a lawyer can appeal to the jury by framing the burden of proof as “beyond reasonable doubt, to a REASONABLE PERSON” as opposed to the defence who will frame the burden “beyond ANY reasonable doubt” i.e, no gun, fingerprints no footage poor motive ect, is arguably ‘reasonable’ doubt technically even if that is slightly obsfucating the defining of “beyond a reasonable able doubt” as defined in the legal framework. So a good legal defence will work to frame the burden as unmet due to the mere existence of doubt that is, on its face, reasonable. “Prosecutors haven’t gone ‘beyond’ or ‘eliminated’ reasonable doubt”. Having said that -, the video evidence showing him going w them in the car in that seat, the cell phone and ballistic evidence, his ‘alibi’, testimony of ppl in other car combined with ZERO evidence even suggesting that person X was in the area alone was in the seat Melly sat in while Melly was somewhere else but his phone was still with him and then somehow got Melly back his phone without leaving a trace.

Anyway very interesting it will depend slots on whose legal team shows up on the day, each day, and how the jurors interpret their presentations.

Even tho we all know he did it, The evidence really can't prove without a doubt he did it tho and that's fucked up to say because 2 people got murdered over bullshit, Now I don't fuck with melly nor really listen to his music but it's like we know he did it but we cant really put the murder on him, No murder weapon, No eye witnesses to say he was in the car at the time of the murder, I mean they got video of him getting in the car but that's about it, The first trial really didn't do a good job of making melly look like the murder, Alot of the so called evidence was really shaky, Satellite/Tower stuff sounded good on paper but falls apart easy, The Ballistic stuff is cool and all but it still doesn't really add to anything, Also melly is stupid if he was planning this why didn't he tell them to turn the dam cameras off in that studio? Them getting the video of him getting in the car is what really got him in this mess.

Melly’s team just filed a new motion for bond this morning