Did you listen to the talking head shows?
Are you considering evidence the jury wasn’t presented?
Are you unable to take in information and recognize it wasn’t part of the jury presentation and discount it?
Aren’t you able to come to a reasonable conclusion?
I didn’t watch those shows at all.
Look, there are simpletons out there, but there are also reasoned people out there that have come to the conclusion this woman is guilty.
Those folks are not simpletons because they see through he Casey defense. I’m tired of seeing them dismissed as simpletons.
No I didn’t listen to the talking heads, I never listen to them about anything, ESPECIALLY not show trials. I have almost none of the evidence the jury was presented. I can take in plenty of information but I don’t have all the information the jury has. I am able to come to reasonable conclusions, but I also understand that because my information set is different than yours or the jury’s my conclusion will probably be different.
Nobody is calling anybody a simpleton. you’re the one obsessed on that word. I’m pointing out, the same as the media is, that information sets are different and therefore conclusions are different and nobody needs to be a simpleton to have different conclusions.
To me the case revolves around one sentence from the prosecutor. He said in his closing argument “we don’t know how she died, we don’t know when she died, we do know somebody in that house killed her”. To me that sentence reeks of reasonable doubt. If I was sitting on a jury and the prosecutor said that I’d vote to acquit regardless of anything else that’s gone on. To me if the prosecutor gets to the end of the trial with that many unknowns there’s no way to convict. That’s me, that’s my conclusion from my information. People who disagree aren’t simpletons, they just have a different information set.