Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AppyPappy
A jury can NEVER hold it against a defendant if they DON'T testify. The judge instructs the jury on this.
41 posted on 07/02/2002 7:14:18 PM PDT by the Deejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: the Deejay
A jury can NEVER hold it against a defendant if they DON'T testify. The judge instructs the jury on this.

Yeah. Sure. That's nice. That means a lot. Except the testimony that is NOT presented by the defendent is NEVER heard by the jury. The judge tells the jury not to act on things they did not hear. Since the jury did not hear the defendent nullify the prosecution's evidence, they had to accept the prosecution's evidence without rebuttal. I've served on a 1st degree murder trial. All we had was the prosecution's evidence. The defense never said a word.

If Westerfield testifies that he went on a trip and never saw the girl, the jury will have to act on that. Combine that with the flimsy prosecution evidence and he walks.

54 posted on 07/02/2002 7:25:45 PM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson