You and I have not interacted in any posts before. Pleased to meet you, DrewsMum. Now, if I may, here is the problem.
I've read a number of your posts. You have REPEATEDLY stated you didn't follow the trial much and you asked for a lot of clarification of very basic facts and evidence. There is nothing at all wrong with that and it seems to me that trial-watching FReepers were happy to oblige.
HOWEVER, when you go on and on about how you think the prosecution did not prove its case, in light of the above facts, it grates on the nerves of FReepers who have given this case a tremendous amount of their time and paid very, very close attention to the facts and evidence, and who are heartsick at what they consider a true miscarriage of justice. Personally, I consider this verdict a travesty, and I work in the legal field. (Not an attorney.)
With all due respect, would you not concede that perhaps your evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the state's case might not be quite as accurate as that of persons who have watched and listened far more closely than you?
Ok, first of all, I said I didn’t follow the CASE closely from 2008 until now....If I said “trial”, please forgive me as the TRIAL didn’t start until a month or so ago and I said I didn’t follow it AT FIRST...but after seeing how things got started, I began to..... I also admitted that I missed parts of the meter reader story and asked for clarification on that. I also said that I was a little confused on the number of chloroform searches....
You then say that I asked for A LOT of clarification on basic facts. Well, if 2 things = A LOT in your opinion, then ok....but most people don’t see it that way, so please don’t misrepresent what I said. You also said that FReepers were happy to oblige. Really? No one ever answered the meter reader question, unless I somehow missed it. Would you mind pinging me to the post because it isn’t showing up on my “ping” page and I have just now gotten a response about the 84 searches, until a few minutes ago, though, no one had answered. So I think you may have mixed up the questions that I asked with someone else. If not, again, feel free to point me in the right direction.
I also do not believe that I presented any evaluations that I may have regarding the strengths/weaknesses of the state’s case as superior to others, as a matter of fact, I very openly stated a couple things I thought were weaknesses presented questions for me BECAUSE I missed some of the info (meter reader)....
I understand that people will disagree with me & with the jury, and with a lot of other people. That’s not what bothers me. The attack on the jury bugs me. The people telling others where they find pictures of the jury & even the identities of some, when they made it clear they don’t want to be identified yet, bothers me. The fact that those jury members will be hounded & death threats made on them & their families bother me. That is NOT America and it messes with the very foundations that our nation was built on.
And just because one watched every minute of the trial & followed the case so closely, doesn’t mean they all agree. There are several who actually agree with the jury. So your whole premise, there, is incorrect.