[UCANSEE2]

And that explains why we have so many differences of opinion.

I was NOT saying that the family should drop everything and forget her killer. They still have the ability and right to SUE that person. Since they now have PROOF, I would think they would succeed.

What I was ANSWERING was your question about did I think it was right he 'got away with it'. My answer was in that context and referred to being put in jail, and possibly executed.

You said nothing about his family or even if she had one.

Here you go trying to get around things, and discuss things you didn't bring up as if it were my fault.

I said legally that he got away with it. (as far as criminal court)

I said that morally it was wrong.

So, are you saying that the family, somehow having this information that the jury decided to acquit to get XMAS SHOPPING done, should not be upset with the jury for total perversion of the JURY CONCEPT? You think that is OK? What if it was your daughter and the JURY acquitted just for convenience sake? Who would you blame for letting him go free? ME?

The family could go after both. There I think we might agree!

[EllaMinnow]

I think that the question that you don't think I answered is, do I think that someone should be executed for a crime if their civil rights were abridged.
Is that the question?
If it is - just say yes.
If it isn't, just ask me the question you want me to answer.

[Jrabbit]

I know about the case red is referring to. I never knew the part about the jury wanting to go Christmas shopping. There were pics found after the fact(trial) and if I'm remembering correctly, he was tried again on Federal(?) charges and is in prison. If I'm wrong I'm sure it will be pointed out immediately. The POINT is that the jury decided on this one and he was found not guilty. The LE didn't screw up by violating his constitutional rights.