It doesn't take a mind reader to realize that someone who truly considers themselves a "Satanist" is a blithering moron...they're not trustworthy in the slightest way around innocent and virtuous people.
Specifically, what evidence would you submit in a court of law to prove those statements? And unless that evidence is directly related to the defendant, it would have to be pretty much inclusive of every professed Satanist. And no, claiming that simply being a Satanist is proof in and of itself that Satanists are morons and untrustworthy is not acceptable.
In addition, proof of the existence of Satan is proof of the existence of God, while the converse is not true. So those who believe in Satan also believe in God, and then they make the obvious wrong choice, and they make it on purpose.
Please don't mistake this discussion as being even remotely theological. If you cannot separate your philosophical opinions from the legal question of whether the prosecution violated the defendants rights then we will both be happier if we let this thread drop.
I have no sympathy.
On a personal note, I would have rather read about this guy's uneventful and fruitless trail of denied appeals, culminating in his well deserved execution. I am disappointed that the prosecution tossed him such a stupid, unnecessary lifeline. They could have easily gotten the death penalty on the merits of the case - there was no need to screw it up with this crap.
Unless, of course, the ulterior motive was to conjure up a legal precedent to criminalize unpopular beliefs.
You’re a bit more long winded than I’m willing to be. “Legalese” lawyer speak is not nearly as cool sounding to me as you might think it sounds to others.
You sound like you’re interested in what lawyers agree are right and wrong, and I’m interested in what is right and wrong. It’s a lot more black and white than you pretend. Logic is all that’s needed.