BornYesterday
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2011
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 0
Only in America do you get more time for shooting a prosecutor the bird than murdering a 2 year child. Oh and by the way hello everybody!
Criticism, threads and insults are quite simply unacceptable. We can disagree with the verdict. However, the right to trial by jury is one of the fundamental guarantees afforded by the US constitution. In fact that the right to trial by jury is provided for in an entrenched constitution is one of the tenets of the US justice system that I most highly rate and wish were present in the UK Justice System. If your going to have a jury system you must respect the verdict and the jury who render it no matter how much you may disagree with it and them.
No. If by the word "threads" you meant to write threats, yes, that is true. Threats are not acceptable. However, criticism, insults, disrespect for the verdict, disgust at the jurors and the expression of that disgust - those are all things that are just as fundamental Constitutional rights of all Americans as is the right to a trial by jury.
As I read somewhere this morning, "we have a system of law, not a system of justice." We are required to respect the process and accept the verdict. But we are not required to in any way agree with it or to agree that it represents a just conclusion. Nor are we required to suppress our outrage. The jury had the right to vote their consciences, God help them, but we have the right to find their verdict wrong, contemptible, disgusting, lacking in even a minimum of intellect, common sense and as some put, brain dust. And most important of all, we have, in our country, the right to express our opinion as often and as loudly as we choose.
Only in America do you get more time for shooting a prosecutor the bird than murdering a 2 year child. Oh and by the way hello everybody!
I think the pertinent question is...what lessons can prosecutors learn from this, what could the prosecution have done to put on a more effective case? I definitely don't think the defense was stellar so the failure here seems to be on the prosecution's side. When you have a verdict returned in less than 11 hours, that 13 jurors (so far) agree on, it shows a significant problem with the state's case.
Ill give u that one. But i think that when the laws bend over backward to protect the rights of the accuse so as to not be overly prejudicial t the accused that it ties the prosecutors hands. That in and of itself is hiding the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Could it have made a difference if they were allowed to shoe her reaction to the remains being found, or her selling her childs photos to fund her defense, or never mentioning caylee while out on bond or not being able to put into evidence all of her previous stealing and comments that she was a psychopath and that cindy wanted to take custody. None of that was allowed cuz it was prejudicial or hearsay. But the defendant, thats a different story. She can say or do pretty much anything to aid in her defense whether it be true or not. U tell me who the sytem protects.
No. If by the word "threads" you meant to write threats, yes, that is true. Threats are not acceptable. However, criticism, insults, disrespect for the verdict, disgust at the jurors and the expression of that disgust - those are all things that are just as fundamental Constitutional rights of all Americans as is the right to a trial by jury.
As I read somewhere this morning, "we have a system of law, not a system of justice." We are required to respect the process and accept the verdict. But we are not required to in any way agree with it or to agree that it represents a just conclusion. Nor are we required to suppress our outrage. The jury had the right to vote their consciences, God help them, but we have the right to find their verdict wrong, contemptible, disgusting, lacking in even a minimum of intellect, common sense and as some put, brain dust. And most important of all, we have, in our country, the right to express our opinion as often and as loudly as we choose.