krkrjx
The answer is blowin' in the wind.
- Joined
- May 4, 2010
- Messages
- 13,160
- Reaction score
- 43,761
Maybe the jury did not have enough evidence to tie Casey to the crime but I do not think the jury was given all the evidence. The most compelling evidence, IMO, was the decomp in the car trunk. They heard about it. They saw photos of the trunk. They never got to smell that smell. Allowing them to do so would have set a precedent, no doubt. And no doubt the judge just did not want to take a chance with that, but if AN ODOR is the evidence, how can that not be presented? Hearing about it does not allow one to smell it. Seeing photos does not allow one to SMELL it. No one needs to be familiar with the smell of decomp to realize it is a smell like no other.
There is just no reason to enter evidence into the record that is not going to be allowed to be examined by the jurors. And I'm sorry but if the only way to fully examine a piece of evidence is to smell it, then smell it they must.
Maybe it wouldn't have been enough but IMO this was evidence that was available in the case was not made available to the jury. And that is just plain WRONG!
There is just no reason to enter evidence into the record that is not going to be allowed to be examined by the jurors. And I'm sorry but if the only way to fully examine a piece of evidence is to smell it, then smell it they must.
Maybe it wouldn't have been enough but IMO this was evidence that was available in the case was not made available to the jury. And that is just plain WRONG!