Re: Good riddance
Your comment is entirely correct but also seems to me to be beside the point. The criminal proceedings are done with and we are discussing the court of public opinon. The fact that the defence, not the prosecution, was the side that got the video excluded suggests it's incriminating; and if it can truly be interpreted as him hitting her 117 times, then that further suggests it shows a prolonged and savage attack. So it's not admissible as legal evidence - that doesn't mean we're all obliged to ignore its existence.