girlhasnoname
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2018
- Messages
- 10,300
- Reaction score
- 133,357
Only during the Death Penalty phase IIRC. moo3 mos of BK.... feel sorry for the jury
It will be too long IMO
they are not sequestered, right?
Only during the Death Penalty phase IIRC. moo3 mos of BK.... feel sorry for the jury
It will be too long IMO
they are not sequestered, right?
I think this is accurate. She wouldn't want to come right out and accuse LE of planting evidence at this stage of the game, but she's laying the groundwork to bring it up later.Saying someone "placed" false evidence at a murder scene is the contrived word, it crafted to minimize reaction, while getting it on record.
It is a huge accusation of the police, or a SODDi prep argument.
Nevertheless the most direct word for the act of "placing" false evidence is "planted."
BT just clarified her meaning so it did not slide by.
RSBM for focus...Who on earth would think BK was just so important that LE or anyone else actually goes to these incredible lengths to frame BK for a quadruple homicide?
Of course, I don't know, but if LE was going to frame a suspect, why frame one working on a doctorate in criminal law? Wouldn't it be simpler to frame the homeless addict under the bridge?
All MOO
That case was eyewitness testimony contradicted by the defendents alibi. Basically the jury did not believe the people who testified he was at a birthday party at the time.I think this is accurate. She wouldn't want to come right out and accuse LE of planting evidence at this stage of the game, but she's laying the groundwork to bring it up later.
I have a hard time believing LE did that, but it's been done before; think Richard Anthony Jones.
That’s why they have number of big strong armed deputies.In my opinion, BK is an extremely dangerous man. To me, he has the aura of a snake. Young and strong, he could do some serious damage in court if he decided he wanted to. If I were the judge, I would require he stay cuffed and shackled during the entire trial. JMO
Totally agreed with you on all of this, but JMO, someone who actually frames or plants evidence-- I don't think such an individual views the crime as important. If the person did, that person would be doing his or her utmost to deal accordingly with the actual perp. By actively trying to distort the truth and carry out a miscarriage of justice, that person shows complete disregard for the importance of the crime.RSBM for focus...
IF BK was framed--and I don't think he was--it wouldn't be because he was "important," but rather because the quadruple homicide was important.
Unfortunately, LE has been known to fudge or plant evidence, coerce confessions, etc., leading to wrong convictions. It does not happen often, but it does happen, which is why the Innocence Project has been able to free hundreds of wrongly convicted defendants.
A notable difference between BK and those found to be wrongly convicted is that BK is a white grad student. In contrast, the majority of those found to be wrongly convicted as a result of police misconduct are minorities who didn't have the means to hire a good defense.
Of course, I don't know, but if LE was going to frame a suspect, why frame one working on a doctorate in criminal law? Wouldn't it be simpler to frame the homeless addict under the bridge?
All MOO
Of course, I don't know, but if LE was going to frame a suspect, why frame one working on a doctorate in criminal law?
Totally agreed with you on all of this, but JMO, someone who actually frames or plants evidence-- I don't think such an individual views the crime as important. If the person did, that person would be doing his or her utmost to deal accordingly with the actual perp. By actively trying to distort the truth and carry out a miscarriage of justice, that person shows complete disregard for the importance of the crime.
"Something else" is important to a person who'd do that, whether it be a job, public opinion, an election, malice towards the individual being framed, what have you. In this case if it were job or public opinion, or an election, totally agreed that those engaging in the framing could have found targets they'd probably view as more "appropriate" for their purposes than BK. That leads me to think BK's strategy would be the malice angle or "an axe to grind" against him personally. And that's why I say "important." MOO.
I'm not suggesting that any imaginary person framed BK. But by the looks of things, this may be something that could be advanced by BK and his BK-driven defense team. Were someone theoretically trying to frame him, I also am not suggesting that such a person actually committed the crime. By "frame," I'm interpreting that to mean a person-- any person with the means to do so-- would be attempting to somehow displace guilt onto an innocent person. That can happen for a lot of reasons, but I agree, I sure don't think that's what is happening here.(snipped for focus) I don't understand. Very few people set out to frame someone by committing a crime. Rather they commit a crime, then frame someone else for it. The crime itself takes precedence, IMO. The reverse doesn't make sense to me.
MOO.
So... how would they know he would be out "driving around."Because he's weird.
MOO
I definitely don't think BK was framed. But had he attempted to claim he'd been framed, my point is that he'd probably try to paint it as him being targeted for personal reasons/malice.
I'm not suggesting that any imaginary person framed BK. But by the looks of things, this may be something that could be advanced by BK and his BK-driven defense team. Were someone theoretically trying to frame him, I also am not suggesting that such a person actually committed the crime. By "frame," I'm interpreting that to mean a person-- any person with the means to do so-- would be attempting to somehow displace guilt onto an innocent person. That can happen for a lot of reasons, but I agree, I sure don't think that's what is happening here.
He was not framed---IMO, if BK was framed, someone did a stellar job on that. Oscar Award level!
If he was framed that would be very hard to prove by the defense. The defense does not need to prove that he was framed, only instill enough reasonable doubt in the jury, to believe that he could have been framed. But that is still a very tall order and doesn't work 90+% of the time... And with all of the other circumstantial evidence they seem to have, I think it will fall flat on its face to the jury. JMO
He was not framed---
So... how would they know he would be out "driving around."
I don't think he was framed, but you make a good point. He has a look and mannerisms that scream, murderer...creep...creepy murderer...I'm not saying he WAS framed. I said that he'd be a great candidate TO frame because of his oddities. MOO
I agree, except I do believe there is a form of Justice when the murderer is tried and convicted by a jury of his peers and is locked away from a free society. It makes me feel better that people like this are not able to commit this type of heinous crime again.I don't think he was framed, but you make a good point. He has a look and mannerisms that scream, murderer...creep...creepy murderer...
Personally, I think he did it, but I wouldn't be super surprised if he were found not guilty.
None of us know for sure, and even a conviction or acquittal isn't a 100% guarantee of guilt or innocence. Look at all the people who have been wrongly convicted and look at those who probably should have been convicted but weren't--cough, cough, OJ, Casey Anthony...
We, as a society, do the best we can, but the idea that there can ever be "justice" for the senseless killing of four beautiful young people is a myth. The criminal justice system would be better named the Criminal Grief System. It merely organizes punishment and consequences but can never restore what was lost or balance the scales of human suffering.