Skip to comments.
Westerfield Jury Reaches Verdict DEATH
o
| Joe Hadenuf
Posted on 09/16/2002 1:46:27 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
Death
TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280 ... 701-704 next last
To: Amore
thanx amore.
It was a shock..I thought he'd get life. But then I thought the jury would be hung too. (of course that was based on the fact that I thought they'd have given more weight to the testimony about what they did that friday night)
To: I. Ben Hurt
REASONABLE DOUBT was abundant in this trial. It's a sad day. Her blood on his clothes and you say there was 'reasonable doubt'?
To: FreeTheHostages
Ping to #226, and thanks again.
To: cyncooper; redlipstick; jdontom
Sorry, that would have been rr's radio. But it's out again..commercials.
To: AppyPappy
I bet he is thinking "Well, I guess I should have testified". Too late now, homeboy.Well, he cooperated with all of them before he got a lawyer. Talked to them all they wanted without a lawyer.
Why would he get on the stand? Lawyers always advise their client not to testify.
245
posted on
09/16/2002 4:51:10 PM PDT
by
carenot
To: FreeTheHostages
The families of the prison guards care. It isn't always another prisoner that gets the shank.
Also, parole boards seem to get it wrong more often than not. And one can never predict the stupidity of future Supreme Courts (state or federal) in releasing killers for whatever obscure technicalities.
The DP prevents/deterrs murder, it is as simple as it is true.
246
posted on
09/16/2002 4:52:17 PM PDT
by
Valpal1
To: fortheDeclaration
But it was such a little spot, doncha know, so it could have reasonably, doubtfully gotten there from transference, or been planted by LE, or left by aliens.
Dang nab it, where's my tinfoil? They're beaming words into my keyboard again.
247
posted on
09/16/2002 4:57:04 PM PDT
by
Valpal1
To: I. Ben Hurt
REASONABLE DOUBT was abundant in this trial. It's a sad day.Yes, it was. They didn't have much of a case at all.
248
posted on
09/16/2002 4:57:28 PM PDT
by
carenot
To: carenot
Hi there..haven't seen ya for awhile.
He dug himself with his own testimony. He told too much. He should have known better.
To: jdontom
This must be a mistake.....Just seen on Court tv upper left hand corner of screen.....van Dam jury deadlocked more at 4:30...am I seeing things. This has been very confusing.. They stated they were deadlocked. The holdout or holdouts (I think it was one) changed their mind and agreed to the DP.
At the reading of the verdict juror number one lost all composure so I wonder if that was her. Judge Mudd had to allow her to compose herself before he would let the attorneys debrief the jury after the verdict.
I think the jury did a great job and I'm glad they took their time in evaluating the evidence.
To: cyncooper
Did you hear this too?
Comments from others who said they heard comments from jurors.
"I just heard two of the jurors on Fox speak out about the case. The blood on the jacket and the dry cleaner trip these two said were key pieces of evidence for them.
Earlier they said Haskell and Hall were not credible and they felt everyone past Faulkner was a "hired gun". "
http://www.websleuths.com/dcf/DCForumID5/768.html
Juror #10 name is tony..just heard on rr's show.
I MISSED SOMETHING..reports just said "something" just put it over the top for the jurors.Did you hear it?
To: FreeTheHostages; All
In short, I um, went off to the races too quickly with ConnectTheDot's use of "if." I find that crow is a dish best enjoyed publicly. And this is to let everyone know that FreeTheHostages and I sent almost simultaneous Freepmails to each other clearing up any misunderstanding. I think it is safe to say that FreeTheHostages are in agreement as to the sanctity of a jury verdict and that the burden of proving DW was wrongly convicted falls entirely on the defense.
Best of all, I have a new FRiend!
To: Valpal1
Also, parole boards seem to get it wrong more often than not. And one can never predict the stupidity of future Supreme Courts (state or federal) in releasing killers for whatever obscure technicalities. In fact the Manson family originally got the death penalty ... or was it just Manson?
To: Joe Hadenuf
What reasonable doubt?Lack of evidence? Lack of credible witnesses?
Sounds like reasonable doubt to me.
254
posted on
09/16/2002 5:04:16 PM PDT
by
carenot
To: BunnySlippers
I heard some yapping on RR's that Feldman was going to have to investigate the jury's decision for deliberating irregularities because of the 3 notes, etc.
Did anyone catch it all, I had a lot of buffering interference.
And my Hubby will be home soon and catch me FReeping again!!! And dinner isn't done (but at least it's not scorched!)
255
posted on
09/16/2002 5:04:36 PM PDT
by
Valpal1
To: All
O'reilly is showing juror statements!!!
To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Earlier they said Haskell and Hall were not credible and they felt everyone past Faulkner was a "hired gun". " I had heard it slightly differently ... that the jury felt that ALL of the bug guys were hired guns (not just Faulkner).
To: carenot
Little girls blood on defendants jacket. Good enough for me, without doubt, a smoking gun....
To: Helen
Maybe some day we'll know the details about what's behind all this.Maybe he can get a new trial with a different judge.
259
posted on
09/16/2002 5:07:47 PM PDT
by
carenot
To: Joe Hadenuf
Yep, the jurors agree with you.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280 ... 701-704 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson