Was Michael Williamson afforded a fair trial and right to confront his accusers or right to witnesses in his favor

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . ; , 71) Was Michael Williamson afforded a fair trial and right to confront his accusers or right to witnesses in his favor when the trial court excluded ; . Logan Blakely and Michael Williamson Jr. as witnesses after admitting prejudicial out of court hearsay statements from Sally Weindorf? California . Vv. Green, 399 U.S. 149; In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133. . 2) Was Michael Williamson afforded a fair trial and right to witnesses in ~ : : his favor when the trial court excluded the admitted offender, Mark Neiswonger, from testifying at trial? Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14, 19 (1967); Chambers v. Mississippi, 420 U.S. 284, 302 (1973); Brady v. , Maryland, 373 U.S. 83; In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133. 3) Did the carbon-copy, duplicious 12 count indictment deny Michael Williamson — . a fair trial and protection from double jeopardy? And does the denial : of the district and cir¢uit courts’ conflict with Valentine v. Konteh, . : _° 395 Fy 3d 626 (6th Cir. 2005)? ; a¢ ° . * . “ihe / .