Replies

I can't help but imagine what I'd be thinking right now if I was placed on that jury.

If I were on the jury, I'd like to think that I would be keeping an open mind and not assume that DW is guilty just because the prosecutor said so. I would want to see proof, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he is guilty.

In the meantime I would be watching everyone's body language, defendent and witnesses, and listening attentively.

In the meantime I would be watching everyone's body language, defendent and witnesses, and listening attentively.

CNN is just now playing the 911 tape ... I must say that she didn't react the way I would have in the same situation.

If I were on the jury, I'd like to think that I would be keeping an open mind and not assume that DW is guilty just because the prosecutor said so. I would want to see proof, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he is guilty.

I would be thinking the same, open mind, looking for doubt. From today's ME's testimony, there's no proof of sexual assault. You can't say DW raped her. He may have, but the reasonable doubt is there. Unless they introduce sperm samples found as evidence from somewhere, how can they prove the pedophilia angle? Pictures on a computer can't prove he acted it out. Also, he may not have sexually assaulted her.

If you can't prove that angle of the motive, the most you can say right now is that he abducted and killed her. Right? What can they claim as motive?