[Henrietta]

The defense has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (or to a "moral certainty" for those who read LaFave) that DW killed Danielle. It is not the responsibility of the defense to prove that he didn't do it. You seem to have the burdens mixed up, oh grand Poohbah.

[Poohbah]

The defense has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (or to a "moral certainty" for those who read LaFave) that DW killed Danielle. It is not the responsibility of the defense to prove that he didn't do it. You seem to have the burdens mixed up, oh grand Poohbah.

Note the term "reasonable doubt."

That little detail keeps getting missed by the Westerfield Fan Club.

There's enough evidence, IMNHO, to convict Westerfield. People HAVE gone to the death chamber or life in prison on less evidence than this. We have a stiff. We have Danielle's blood on Westerfield's clothes. We have fiber evidence. We also have Westerfield's attorney working overtime to suppress evidence, and then getting caught "accidentally" (wink wink!) misleading the jury about that evidence.

Sorry, but if I were on the jury, I'd ignore everything in the defense case after THAT little pecadillo. If the prosecution had been caught doing likewise, I'd be a guaranteed vote to acquit.

You get one chance to tell me the truth in a trial. Miss that chance, you're hosed.

[willyone]

Don't you mean the prosecution? You must be the confused one.

[cinFLA]

The defense has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (or to a "moral certainty" for those who read LaFave) that DW killed Danielle.

prosecution