Quote:
Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly  I didn't watch the trial itself but coverage in the evenings at times. More and more it seems like juries these days in very high-profile criminal cases do require a CSI-like rock-solid type proof beyond a reasonable doubt before they are willing to convict and many of the more respected lawyers without an agenda didn't seem to think the State had a very strong case or evidence that couldn't be interpreted either way. A lot of them and even TV news reporters said the prosecution witnesses seemed to be testifying for the defense at times and I did see some of their re-run bits of testimony and it did seem that way sometimes. Still, I was surprised at acquittal. I'd thought the jury might have gone for manslaughter just based on all the media and social pressure. |
But THAT is NOT justice...that is delivering a sentence based NOT on the evidence presented, but by mob reaction to the event. If this country ever reaches a point where we revert to hanging people because a riled up mob is demanding NOT justice, but revenge, then we are back to the days of Tombstone and the wild West. Thank God the jury was sequestered and was not knowledgablh of all the media bias and social pressure. They based their decision strictly on the evidence as it was given to them.