Madeleine74
Knower of Things
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,081
I'm glad they followed the written instructions for rendering their verdict. Reasonable doubt is confusing for many. A lot of people think you have to have ZERO doubt about everything to convict and that is not the standard. And neither is a jury to consider each item of evidence separate/apart from the totality of all the evidence put together.
No one in a circumstantial case would ever be convicted if all juries did was debate each item or behavior and decide whether an explanation for it (and it alone) could be explained away as something normal or mere coincidence. It's only when putting everything together that a picture can emerge.
No one in a circumstantial case would ever be convicted if all juries did was debate each item or behavior and decide whether an explanation for it (and it alone) could be explained away as something normal or mere coincidence. It's only when putting everything together that a picture can emerge.