Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Capt. Tom

No it was not what happened in the Simpson trial. In that case the chance of innocence was conclusively, without challenge, 3/infinity and those theoretical three were not associated with the victims. Practically speaking that means both asides agreed, one by proof and the other tacitly, that the chance of innocence was zero. The jury knew that too. The statement they made was that the white bi-ch deserved it. If that’s jury nullification, OK....so be it. I didn’t think Nicole deserved it, but that’s just me. Oh, I am an attorney in practice and academia; specialty field-science in the courtroom.


27 posted on 03/17/2012 11:25:43 AM PDT by jschwartz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: jschwartz
The statement they made was that the white bi-ch deserved it. If that’s jury nullification, OK....so be it. I didn’t think Nicole deserved it, but that’s just me.

That is what I think happened, and to me it is jury nullification.

The jury couldn't say yes, we believe he did it, but we think it was justified, and we don't want him punished.
The sentence is up to the judge, and not the jury so the easiest way out is "Not Guilty."- Tom

28 posted on 03/17/2012 11:37:44 AM PDT by Capt. Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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