JUSTICE IN AMERICA--PONDERING THOUGHTS

[Bretsky]

What a sad day it was yesterday for the Justice System in America.

Beyond a resonable doubt seems to mean beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Fool Proof DNA and physical evidence...aka...CSI shows....seem to be a necessity

Common Sense and the idea of connecting the dots are a lost cause.

Prosecutors need to understand this as well when deciding which charges and penalties to pursue.

Going for less and getting a conviction seems far more rewarding than shooting for the moon and letting a gulty party walk free.

[Bretsky]

OOPS...............PLZ MOVE THIS TO FYI IF IT BELONGS THERE INSTEAD

[SkinBasket]

Fool Proof DNA and physical evidence...aka...CSI shows....seem to be a necessity

I've seen interviews with prosecutors who fucking hate those shows because: a) they were very popular, and b) most people are too dumb to realize that real police work and prosecution doesn't work that way. So they show up, get selected as jurors, then expect there to be a holographic display of the murder created by a government super-computer, video evidence from an orbiting satellite, and DNA evidence leading from the suspects home, to the murder scene, on the body and a murder weapon, then back home again. Because that's what they saw on the moving picture box, so that's what they expect in a real courtroom. Anything less, they consider "reasonable doubt." Problem is, the modern juror lacks the ability to reason.

On the other side, given the short time to deliberate, I just believe the prosecution did not make their case.

[mraynrand]

I guess we'll have to start searching America's golf courses for the real killer...

[K-town]

The three most terrifying words in the English language: "trial by jury."

[MJZiggy]

I've seen interviews with prosecutors who fucking hate those shows because: a) they were very popular, and b) most people are too dumb to realize that real police work and prosecution doesn't work that way. So they show up, get selected as jurors, then expect there to be a holographic display of the murder created by a government super-computer, video evidence from an orbiting satellite, and DNA evidence leading from the suspects home, to the murder scene, on the body and a murder weapon, then back home again. Because that's what they saw on the moving picture box, so that's what they expect in a real courtroom. Anything less, they consider "reasonable doubt." Problem is, the modern juror lacks the ability to reason.

On the other side, given the short time to deliberate, I just believe the prosecution did not make their case.

I've heard interviews with lawyers and comments from the jurors and they said that the jury did what it had to do in this case for that exact reason. The jury took their duty very seriously and did what they had to do because the prosecution did not make their case.

[mraynrand]

The jury took their duty very seriously and did what they had to do because the prosecution did not make their case.

That makes me feel better. Now the DA only has to go out and find the real killer.

[mraynrand]

Time to Party!!!

[MJZiggy]

That makes me feel better. Now the DA only has to go out and find the real killer.

She probably was the real killer. The only problem is that probably doesn't cut it in a murder trial. It's the whole innocent until proven guilty stuff. What would make you feel better is that Casey Anthony will rot in hell for all eternity for what she did.

[Bretsky]

I've heard interviews with lawyers and comments from the jurors and they said that the jury did what it had to do in this case for that exact reason. The jury took their duty very seriously and did what they had to do because the prosecution did not make their case.

Not buying it

Or we're listening to different lawyers

After it occured I listed to about three hours of post verdict stuff. Nearly every lawyer thought the jury was looking for shadow of a doubt instead of reasonable doubt. They all thought there was massive massive circumstantial evidence and a jury should have the ability to use an ounce of common sense to connect the dots.

Gosh that jury was worse than a dam mortgage underwriter !!

[mraynrand]

She probably was the real killer. The only problem is that probably doesn't cut it in a murder trial. It's the whole innocent until proven guilty stuff. What would make you feel better is that Casey Anthony will rot in hell for all eternity for what she did.

Not if she repents. Just ask the prisoner on the cross - Luke 23:39

(Note also that having his soul saved did not spare him from punishment for his earthly crimes)

[Bretsky]

She probably was the real killer. The only problem is that probably doesn't cut it in a murder trial. It's the whole innocent until proven guilty stuff. What would make you feel better is that Casey Anthony will rot in hell for all eternity for what she did.

all this questioning....you must be a liberal democrat

I lean Republican; we think outside the box and want everybody to go to heaven !!

[MJZiggy]

Not buying it

Or we're listening to different lawyers

After it occured I listed to about three hours of post verdict stuff. Nearly every lawyer thought the jury was looking for shadow of a doubt instead of reasonable doubt. They all thought there was massive massive circumstantial evidence and a jury should have the ability to use an ounce of common sense to connect the dots.

Gosh that jury was worse than a dam mortgage underwriter !!

It's the defense that works with reasonable doubt. If they create reasonable doubt, the jury has to acquit. The prosecution has to prove guilt. The quotes from the jury say they were sick about having to acquit, but it's what they had to do based on the evidence. I'm not saying I like it, but based on the law, it's what they had to do.

[MJZiggy]

all this questioning....you must be a liberal democrat

I lean Republican; we think outside the box and want everybody to go to heaven !!

Actually, I'm told I lean toward Buddhism which means it's not my place to judge others. If she did it, God will take care of it, no? Check the article that our friend posted to facebook.

[Bretsky]

It's the defense that works with reasonable doubt. If they create reasonable doubt, the jury has to acquit. The prosecution has to prove guilt. The quotes from the jury say they were sick about having to acquit, but it's what they had to do based on the evidence. I'm not saying I like it, but based on the law, it's what they had to do.

I get that; I'm not buying that there was reasonable doubt.......

I think the jury members were dumbasses not able to distinguish reason from a shadow of doubt. And they can go through withdrawals dening that if makes them feel better.

I think our system sux; I think these sequestered jury members were mostly unhappy with having to spend a good portion of their summer on this
I think the sequestering is a terrible idea and actually works against justice. These yahoos become friends rather than individuals more likely to debate hard on the issues

Dumbasses