Subject:
|
Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 17 May 1999 23:40:30 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpien@ctp*stopspam*.IWANTNOSPAM.com
|
Viewed:
|
1141 times
|
| |
|
|
John Neal wrote:
>
> Two things.
>
> 1) You can *never* be 100% sure that anyone committed any crime with
> circumstantial evidence.
Agreed. But it takes "beyond a reasonable doubt" not "certain", We had
very reasonable doubts based on what we were presented.
But I'm pretty sure this particular perp was guilty, or that the DA was
lying to us about the circumstances. There was a knife with his prints
on it, and the blood of the victim (DNA match) and testimony of the
victim and an eye witness to his using the knife that could not be
admitted (to one of the prior cases) because of police incompetence.
They tainted the evidence and broke the custody chain. This was pre OJ
but very much a similar situation, with less media attention.
> 2) Were you a juror for the O.J. travesty, uh sorry, trial?
No.
But since you asked... OJ got the right verdict, both times. IM(1)HO.
The police bungled his case, and he was correctly acquitted. Better that
a hundred guilty walk free than that 1 innocent be unjustly punished.
The civil case correctly nailed him. Criminal acquittal is no defence in
a civil trial, which only requires a preponderance of evidence, not
freedom from reasonable doubt. There's no doubt in my mind that there
was a preponderance of evidence there although there was a reasonable
doubt.
1 - (not at all)
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
FDIC Know your Customer is wounded, thanks to you, but not dead...
See http://www.defendyourprivacy.com for details
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
| Two things. 1) You can *never* be 100% sure that anyone committed any crime with circumstantial evidence. 2) Were you a juror for the O.J. travesty, uh sorry, trial? -John <donning asbestos suit for wrath of Lar> (...) Repeat after me. I was (...) (26 years ago, 17-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
