Replies

I think there is another aspect too. Many of us have spent months listening to this trial, educating ourselves, following the threads. Many of us have started out indifferent, or possibly believing the police had the right guy. Many of us have sat in revulsion while we watched the prosecution lie, pervert testimony, and watched the judge allow this perversion of a trial to continue. Many of us have spent hours trying to marry the prosecutions case to the guilt of Westerfield, and it just isn't adding up.

Then we have someone come onto the post and essentially tell us we are stupid, and that we should have to prove that Westerfield is guilty. I guess these type of posters have forgotten they live in the US. The burden to prove guilt is on the prosecutions head. It is not the burden of the accused to prove innocence.

So a hint to some of these type of posters would be to go thru past threads. Most of us who believe this case is weak at best, have laid out over and over the inconsistencies. And even though many of us feel that Westerfield is probably innocent, we have more than proven the reasonable doubt in this case.

Many of us have spent months listening to this trial, educating ourselves, following the threads.

You posted this earlier on this thread at #279:

And the "rape video" is animation which the US Supreme Court has ruled is not a crime.

On what do you base this assertion?

Why does Feldman argue in his closing that the rape videos are of real girls? Why does he tell the jury that the females in the videos are not under eighteen and therefore not illegal? Why would age enter into his argument if the videos were "only" animation?

From Feldman's closing argument:

THE SAME WITH THE MPEGS, FRANKLY. I'M SORRY, MY SLANG. THE RAPE VIDEOS THAT YOU ALL, ALL OF US HAD THE EXPERIENCE WITH. IF THOSE FEMALES ARE OVER 18, THERE'S NO CRIME. END OF DISCUSSION. GROSS, OKAY. DISGUSTING, OKAY. INAPPROPRIATE, OKAY. ENOUGH TO SHOCK YOU, OKAY. ENOUGH TO BIAS YOU, DEFINITELY. ENOUGH TO PREJUDICE YOU AGAINST MR. WESTERFIELD, ABSOLUTELY. THE PLAN. BUT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CONSIDER BIAS, PASSION OR PITY OR PREJUDICE. OBJECTIVELY, THOSE PICTURES DON'T DEPICT FEMALES UNDER THE AGE OF 18. PERIOD. LOOK. AND I'M NOT ENCOURAGING TO LOOK FOR ANY PURINE INTEREST OR ANY INTEREST. THAT'S BAD ENOUGH. BUT WHAT THEY DID WAS TAKE TWO OR THREE VIDEOS OUT OF THOUSANDS AND CLAIM THIS IS A TRUE AND ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF MR. WESTERFIELD.

-SNIP-

WAIT A MINUTE. IN THE THOUSANDS OF DOWNLOADS WE FOUND A VIDEO OR TWO OR FIVE OR TEN THAT MAYBE PROVE THE POINT. SO BY THAT LOGIC, ANY OF US WHO MAY POSSESS ANYTHING LIKE THAT ARE GOING TO GO OUT AND KILL CHILDREN. RIGHT? ISN'T THAT THE LOGIC?

-End Excerpt-

Also note, it is not "rape video" singular, it is "rape videos" plural. Two or five or ten per Mr. Feldman.

"So a hint to some of these type of posters would be to go thru past threads. Most of us who believe this case is weak at best, have laid out over and over the inconsistencies. And even though many of us feel that Westerfield is probably innocent, we have more than proven the reasonable doubt in this case."

That's not bad advice, IMO, for those that drop in and express their opinion, without the slightest idea what has, or has not, transpired in court. Personally, I find these type of posters only slightly irritating, but what I think has triggered some of the angrier flames recently, are those that had DW convicted and strapped to a gurney, before one shred of testimony was ever heard in the case and are now back here espousing the same "hang him" mantra, without appearing to have shown any more interest in learning what facts might actually exist in the case.

I know, it doesn't bother me in the slightest to have opinions, that differ from my own, expressed, but they are much more meaningful and certainly more palatable, IMO, when they are based on at least some degree of knowledge. JMO of course.