[The Other Harry]

Profiling us...

I may be wrong here, but in following these threads for the past week or so (yes, I'm a Johnnie-come-lately), one of the things I've noticed is that those of us who are most in favor of acquittal usually seem to fall into one of two groups:

- Males whose ages and life situations are similar to DW's (this includes me)

- Females who are analytical and who are over about the age of 40

He does not seem to do so well with young people of either sex or with older married males.

If there is any truth to this, I think DW may actually stand a chance with the jury he's drawn.

Anyone else been thinking about this?

[small_l_libertarian]

I'm 31 and a woman. I am a programmer, so may fit into your analytical mold. I'd like to think I'm young, though. :-)

[hoosiermama]

Analytical is the key.
If younger people have been TAUGHT to analize he has a chance. If all the jury knows is to react not chose to act, he doesn't.

SO who do you think will vote how in the jury? Why?

[John Jamieson]

I'm an older married male, but I agree with you on the younger more idealistic persons. It doesn't work across the board though, we've got many DW lynchers in our same age groups, and some have studied the case very well.

[gigi]

I've read some of the guys here express that they were single and careful around children. Frankly, even if your married you need to be careful It's the times we live in.

And since I'm 40, almost 41, Pretty good profiling!

Young people may me too lazy too think for themselves.

I have been surprised at how many people refuse to take a closer look at the defense's case. They seem to think that the cops are right and thats that! You would think, as conservatives we would at least be suspicious of the media spin.

[sunshine state]

Well, I'm (just!) under 40, but I like to think I'm analytical.

:)

[Jaded]

You're scaring me.

[jacquej]

Well, almost in the "geeezer" category here, as I am almost 59, a grandma, and am intuitive, but logical... I think you are right about women who have learned over the years to distrust purely "emotional" reactions when making judgements about people and events...

I notice that the women who are in the "hang Westerfield" camp are seriously "logic-impaired", and have real problems following the evidence.

They also make the mistake of believing most of what they hear and see in the media, and can't separate the wheat from the chaff...

Now, the men in the "hang Westie" camp are very confusing to me, probably because I have no life experience with men who operate on raw emotion... Most of the men I include in my life have better reasoning skills than shown by these morons.

And, in watching my four children grow beyond their 20's, I noticed that they really didn't stop reacting with emotion as the primary focus until after about 28, and it was a alow process, with turning 30 being pretty much the beginning of realizing that what they "felt" wasn't such a good way of making judgements and choices in life.

They are so much more fun to be around now that they are truly adult, and can figure out the difference between what they want and what they need...

[Yeti]

I'm not quite 40 yet.... This is my first year at 39 and intend to have several more ;)

My personal observation, and I know I'll be flamed for it, is that there are only 2 "smart" posters in the VDA camp, and they have both been very dishonest. In fact, the less-mature-seeming one of the 2 isn't necessarily all that smart, just likes to try to sound smart.

I'll leave it to you to guess which 2 posters I mean.