Graves also argued that the cases against father and son should be split because of the “huge disparity” in evidence against the two. He argued evidence against Richard Scruggs seemed more substantial than that gathered against his client.
“Their proof against Zach is so minimal,” Graves said. “The proof that they’re going to offer against his father would be a lot more than that. And our concern is a jury wouldn’t be able to judge him based solely on the minimal proof (prosecutors) indicate they’re going to offer at this point.”
Clarion Ledger
2/26/8
About the Author(s)
Magnolia Tribune
This article was produced by Magnolia Tribune staff.
More Like This
Previous Story
Next Story
