Hi everyone i am an occasional lurker on this site but have read every page of the trial threads.
To restore my faith in humanity, i am hoping that you are all privvy to some special, extra info not contained herein (e.g. a history of appalling violence, rape or molestation). As it stands, all i see is a witch hunt of an innocent boy based on, literally, nothing. The name calling is shameful and the logic applied by many is not only flawed but worryingly biased.
I have no doubt that, even if found not guilty, the majority on here will consider him guilty regardless. It is scary to think that, assuming mostly adults post on this thread, any one of you could be considered for jury service.
I'm positive that many of you would relish referring to this boy as a "psycho 16 year old lying pedophile freak" as opposed to 'the accused' in line with what the above poster suggested. Unfortunately that says more about you than it does him.
I'm sorry my first post is somewhat confrontational but it seems any discussion (which you are all sure is calm, considered and appreciative of all viewpoints) that doesn't denote bloodboiling from the accused's 'arrogent', 'narcissistic', 'cold', 'psychopathic', 'immature' 'goading' behaviour is not entertained.
I usually enjoy lurking here when an interesting case arises but the twisted logic applied to the circumstances and the determination in condemning the defendant has left a bad taste in my mouth. Very odd indeed.
I don't agree 100% with your post, but i do mirror a number of the points you have made as i too feel (discussion in general aside) that there is an odd sense of determination to condemn which i too find quite uncomfortable.
I had this very conversation last night with a friend last night - i specifically said it worried me to think that a jury (which is by all accounts a random cross section of members of the public) could potentially be made up of people who seem to see things without shades of grey, or get 'nervous' or 'on edge' at the thought of a not guilty verdict. To me that isn't a jury.
There is something about this trial which still doesn't sit right with me. No matter who you look at it, there is fundamentally a lack of concrete evidence against the accused, and whilst his defence to some may seem far fetched it is a defence which has been successfully proven in other cases. It is also something that one of the experts deemed 'technically possible'.
It boils down to this. Either the 16 year old on the stand is a one-in-a-million, acutely advanced psychopath, with the potential to kill again, or there is something far more fundamental at the root of this case. My inclination is to go with the latter.
My gut feeling is, the lack of carelessness in terms of evidence at both the abduction site (the MacPhail's home) and the accused's own home does not add up with the obvious carelessness at the murder scene. Regardless of how you look at this, it simply does not fit.
Lastly, i see no motive. I think the idea that he had been planning this throughout the day is as far fetched as it gets - if he was, he certainly didn't plan particularly well given the mess that was left at the murder scene. However, i do see motive in certain other people involved.
I agree with everyone that justice for Alesha MacPhail is of the upmost importance, but if the wrong person is convicted, that in itself is doing that poor little girl the biggest injustice that could be done.
