Why I said not guilty: Etan Patz juryÂ’s lone holdout speaks

New York Post ^ | May 10, 2015 | Adam Sirois

[Conscience of a Conservative]

I knew that I would start from the presumption of innocence. I knew that because we are told we should start from that presumption.

There were certainly plenty of times I think we all had during the trial — moments, just “wow” moments.

Like, “Oh, my God, that throws a lot of doubt in it!” Or, “Oh, my God, he did it!” For me, there were moments — different days, different periods of time — when I could have gone either way.

That’s the whole point. Then you go into deliberations.

[Conscience of a Conservative]

Really interesting look at the inner workings of jury deliberations. I'm sure the other jurors may disagree, but based on what this guy said, it looks like he really understands the role of a jury in our system. Good to see.

[Lurking Libertarian]

There was no physical evidence tying this suspect to the crime. There were no eyewitnesses. There was a confession, but it came from a man with psychiatric issues and it revealed no details that only the murderer would have known. And there was another suspect. All of this together to me spells reasonable doubt.