Posted on 03/24/2005 5:04:36 AM PST by Hawk44
The simple fact of the matter is that jurors are not supposed to have to be smart. It is not the job of the jurors to 'do the math' as mentioned in an earlier post. In fact, they are not supposed to infer anything on their own.
It is the job of the prosecutor to explain to the jury in terms that any dumb rock can understand why they should vote guilty. It is the job of the prosecutor to do any math needed (or have an expert do if for him) and be able to explain it so that any idiot on the street can understand it. That did not happen in this case.
Prosecution has a weak case, does a louzy job, and blasts the jury -- typical LA prosecutors!
ROTF!!!
I think, but I'm not 100% sure, that Oliver Wendall Holmes coined the phrase. Your comment on the O.J. case is right on. In my mind, the jury could have gone either way and they would not have been wrong.
No, it was simple anger at losing and the desire to blame someone else for his failure. Sour grapes would be "I didn't want a conviction anyway because its meaningless."
Sorry, but being an old Aesop fan, misuse of that term really gets to me.
The victim needed killing.
The difference in the Scott Peterson case was Laci was pretty. And I wouldn't hire Mark Geragos to fix a speeding ticket.
Except for Vincent Bulosi it would appear so (that last decent Prosecutor). The entire Califonia DA system is hopelessly sick.
I think you're right. From the little I've followed it, it seemed that the strategy of the prosecution was to paint the victim as such a despicable piece of trash that anybody stuck with her would have done the same thing, therefore he must be guilty. The defense agreed with the trash assessment. The jurors may have consciously or subconsciously decided that the skank deserved it, and a public service had been performed by the killer. From everything we hear about her, it’s hard to disagree.
Blake took one for the team of humanity, and humanity looked the other way in appreciation. Sets a real bad legal precedent, but sends the right message to trailer trash everywhere.
Didn't Blake's wife try to get money from Marlin Brando's son by trying to convice him she was going to have his baby?
So here we have a wife that's had an affair and is trying to extort money from her lover.
She doesn't sound like a nice woman at all. And it wouldn't surprise me to find out that there were many people that wanted her dead.
the jury didn't want to believe two witnesses who said Blake asked about having his wife killed, yet they believed Blake, who left his gun back at the restaurant....
know, how many men leave their guns?.......
I remember reading a year or so ago that the investigation into this case was the most extensive ever done in Los Angeles....simply because they didn't want another OJ fiasco.
So much for good intentions.
that is not the real world.....
juries are now taking it upon themselves to look for any reason NOT to convict....
they are not supposed to check their common sense at the door....they are supposed to look at the totality of the evidence, the witness statements, the statement of the defendent, etc...
I think Blake was in jail before.....yet he is believed more than two other low lifes?
007 never existed. But Hollywood's got a license to kill, that's for sure.
As do I. Especially in light of the lengthy statute of limitations on both cases.
On every press release the prosecution made, I thought, "If they haven't got more than this, they're stupid to proceed"
There was no evidence pointing to Blake
The DA based his case on motive (share by Balke as an army os suckers Nakley conned) and the testimony of a couple of whacked=out sleazebags.
The Jury wasn'r buying
There was no evidence pointing to Blake
The DA based his case on motive (shared by Blake and an army of suckers Nakley conned) and the testimony of a couple of whacked=out sleazebags.
The Jury wasn'r buying
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.