I get it, especially for the convicted murderer. What can thwart the process though, is when everyone online and in the general public starts mobbing and digitally thrashing any person who dares step up to speak on behalf of the one convicted.
If someone wants to stand before the court and share their experience of time with the Murderer they should be reasonably free from having their personal lives and details picked apart and posted as they are unrelated to the case at hand.
Why should her personal issues matter if she's only wanting to share some simple statement with the court? For example:
"While the things of recent are rotten and bad in my former friend's case, the convicted person didn't seem like this when we hung out long long ago. You see, during the month of April in 1986, Jodi was my BFF and we played hopscotch and zelda till midnight during a slumber party. She didn't try to stalk and kill anyone during that month. I never thought we would be here today. Thank you."
We all know Jodi exceeds the boundaries of vileness. Thrashing anyone associated with her: family, friends, teachers, coworkers, boyfriends, even her former childhood era friend(s), seems like an example of less than polished form. IMHO. We can respectfully doubt, disagree with and even ignore sources of info without crossing over the line that differentiates acceptable civil activity and hostile abusive behavior.
:truce: