This message was self-deleted by its author

Show all your cards at trial or risk losing any chance of presenting evidence in the future.

You can hope that the Appellate Court will allow "new evidence," but it better be REALLY NEW, i.e., it didn't exist or it wasn't discovered at the time of trial.

I've tried for a Reconsideration (of evidence presented at trial) with a return to trial. That's even harder.

Once you're in Appellate Court, all you can essentially debate is the law and procedure. Facts are essentially recorded in stone.

There is the possibility that your case could have prevailed with the additional evidence at trial, but you failed to make it available for consideration. And you could be looking at a friendly new case of legal malpractice by your client.

That is when a new witness or piece of evidence comes out after the first trial, but you have to show that you had no way to introduce that in the original trial. And then it just goes back to the original judge to see if they will declare a mistrial.

He’s eating the pieces.” —Joe Scarborough

or suffer fools.

But also at play is the inevitable outcome due to no existing evidence to support the case. Just that weeds out most reputable attorneys. There may be a small handful of lawyers willing to play Don Quixote for a large fee, but like you say he doesn't even make good on payments so the field narrows to Rudy et al.

so it can be revealed at just the right time, is an actual legal strategy. I’m not a lawyer, but even I know that isn’t a thing. These people live in a strange world that isn’t shared by the rest of us.

Keep your best evidence - and your best witnesses - for the Supreme Court

Perry Moron is more like it.