I'm mildly interested to know whether, logically, jury could have come back with "not guilty" on, like, a couple of the charges. Was there any differentiation in the evidence?
(emphasis on mildly. F that guy).
Not a lawyer, but I saw some comment that most counts rely on the same facts, in other words all individual wrongful records are all crimes if the same action they all were made to cover up for is a crime
They'd mentioned there was some possible grey area on the checks that were signed by others, like the son, on behalf of the convict, so they mentioned if ever there might be grounds for "reasonable doubt," it might be on those. Jury decided there was no reasonable doubt of the guilt on these, too.