[John Jamieson]

"People are not supposed to throw out all common sense. They can come to the conclusion that ther are too many "coincidences"."

I disagree, especially in a death case. "beyond reasonable doubt" which has been described as "to a moral certainty" is required.

[BunnySlippers]

I disagree, especially in a death case. "beyond reasonable doubt" which has been described as "to a moral certainty" is required.

Good point. As a member of the public I vote guilty ... but if I were a member of that jury I honestly don't know what I would vote. But I can definately tell you I would NOT vote for the death penalty for DW even though I firmly believe he killed that little girl.

[VRWC_minion]

I disagree, especially in a death case. "beyond reasonable doubt" which has been described as "to a moral certainty" is required.

Jury instructions given to CA jury that were determined to meet consitutional test by US SC

"Reasonable doubt is defined as follows: It is not a mere possible
doubt; because everything relating to human affairs, and depending on moral evidence, is open to some possible or imaginary doubt. It is
that state of the case which, after the entire comparison and
consideration of all the evidence,leaves the minds of the jurors in
that condition that they cannot say they feel an abiding conviction,
to a moral certainty, of the truth of the charge."
>Link