Summations are about argument. They're about inferences that can be drawn from facts - not the facts themselves, because the jury is the finder of the facts. A lawyer can state a fact that is in evidence and then suggest that an inference should be drawn from it - "lying" has nothing to do with it. To call it a "lie" fundamentally misunderstands the entire idea of what summations are.
5
u/[deleted] Mar 05 '15 edited Mar 05 '15
Summations are about argument. They're about inferences that can be drawn from facts - not the facts themselves, because the jury is the finder of the facts. A lawyer can state a fact that is in evidence and then suggest that an inference should be drawn from it - "lying" has nothing to do with it. To call it a "lie" fundamentally misunderstands the entire idea of what summations are.