This isn't about DWI. It's about whether he murdered someone.... There is not any evidence of malice in this case. If you find him at fault, you certainly can't convict him of anything more than manslaughter.

With the medical evidence, we could prove that was not the case.

There's a lot of evidence to the contrary. If that were the case, then we certainly would not be doing this.

There are a lot of myths about what the evidence is in this case, ... Some of them are misunderstandings based upon erroneous media reports, some spring from confusion in the evidence itself, and some are the result of concerted partisan distortion.

Whatever relevance such evidence may have to prove other elements of plaintiff's case, it does not have anything to do with the issues presented by the president's and Ferguson's motions for summary judgment. I.e., whether plaintiff herself was the victim of alleged quid pro quo or a hostile work environment, sexual harassment, whether the president and Ferguson conspired to deprive her of her civil rights, or whether she suffered emotional distress so severe in nature that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.

That guy's evidence - and his case - was toast,