View Single Post
Old 12-21-2006, 01:23 PM  
PurrrsianPussyKat
Confirmed User
 
PurrrsianPussyKat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Lost in the mountains
Posts: 2,088
You need to be able to convict without reasonable doubt.

The fact that the defense attorney is going to hammer on their being no conclusive dna testing is going to get them off. Don't forget, jurys are made up of the same people that are not reading your quotes in this thread and are forming opinions. They sit on the jury and think about how they can't wait to go home, not the facts.

Look at the oj trial. They find some blood soaked leather glove that shriveled up like an old mans penis and said, This can't be his as it's to small. Well, duh. But if you throw that "reasonable doubt" at the jury enough times as well as the shunken glove, they come back with a not guilty verdict.

These boys are all "well off, upstanding citizens" and they are being accused by whom? No one a jury is going to believe.

My prediction : Not guilty
__________________
Need a reliable, reasonably priced php programmer? Hit me up! 2934409
PurrrsianPussyKat is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote