Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Smokin' Joe

Since the perp (former) is innocent then why not hire her as a babysitter. I would, as a believer of the perfect system that you so enthusiastically describe, in a cliche after cliche, as if we haven’t heard them before a thousand times. The Founders, oh, yes, they’d be hi-fiving today. A perfect application of their principles. If we had only applied them at Nuremberg or to Charles Manson. Better let O.J. Simpson free and committing other crimes, than to convict him on the chance that the gloves did fit at the time of the crime! Yawn!


90 posted on 07/05/2011 7:44:19 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]


To: Revolting cat!
Since the perp (former) is innocent then why not hire her as a babysitter.

I believe there was adequate evidence presented to indicate this person was indeed irresponsible. That does not pass my hiring requirements for a babysitter.

That does not make her guilty of first degree murder, either.

The State, in the eyes of the jury, lacked sufficient evidence to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Period. The jury has spoken.

Charles Manson, Nuremburg, and OJ Simpson are irrelevant to this case.

OJ's acquittal was done in the face of far tighter physical evidence, and the fact that the prosecutor failed to make the point that leather shrinks when it has been wet, even with blood.

There just might have been some jury nullification going on there, too, absolving OJ because of other factors, partly the villification of Mark Fuhrman, who proved his worth as a detective solving the Martha Moxley case, again, with sufficient evidence to eliminate all reasonable possibilities otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Keep in mind that that "reasonable doubt" consistsof the ability to present an alternative and credible scenario. Accidental death is not murder in the first degree, and that reasonable doubt was well set in the mind of the jury. Inappropriate actions afterwards might point to the very real possibility of prior foul play, but in the absence of proving that such foul play not only occurred, but was unaccountable except by the actions of the accused, the State failed to make its case.

The presumption of innocence applies.

However, I have been known not to hire babysitters based on a 'vibe', if you will, and need not adhere to the 'reasonable doubt standard' when hiring someone to watch over my kids, which is rare with the profusion of relatives around.

111 posted on 07/05/2011 8:36:52 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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