Problem is the evidence that the prosecution put on was more like suggested theory and none of the so called factual evidence was supported. I think she had something to do with the death but I could see nothing solid. This convicting on circumstantial evidence has been responsible for thousands of innocent being sent to prison only to be found later they did not do it. Judgment is now in the hands of God. That is if you truly believe in our system of law which is not perfect.
So convict on a lesser charge!
We KNOW she was guilty of at least criminal neglect - the 31 days...
>>I think she had something to do with the death but I could see nothing solid. This convicting on circumstantial evidence...<<
Circumstantial evidence is used to convict in an extremely high percentage of cases in the world, since the beginning of jurisprudence, and rightly so.
I’m astounded that people throw around the term “circumstantial evidence” as if it were some sort of second-rate, unreliable evidence.
Such a misunderstanding and ignorance of the law is prevalent, however, as demonstrated yesterday.
You say that you think she had something to do with the death? Me too. I think she killed her baby.
So let’s recognize this for what it is, not some judicial “victory” to be “celebrated.” There are Freepers taunting other Freepers that this is a VICTORY, high-fiving, and arrogantly rubbing it in everyone’s faces.
This is no victory. It is a DEFEAT for justice, Justice was not served. Just because the guilty will necessarily go free on occasion, doesn’t mean it’s a GOOD THING.
It’s not.