Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtclub
2. I sat on a jury last December. Criminal case. When the prosecution rested, my thought was "That's it, they brought a case on THAT"? We acquitted in 90 minutes, and most of that time was convincing one holdout who was on the fence. I was seriously appalled, and frightened.
|
some of that is for the public's sense of order maybe? my wife sat on a murder case-
the guy admitted he shot this guy, for talking to his girlfriend- killed him in the middle of a residential street- the only question was murder 2 or 1? she kept coming home and saying "the D. will win," of "win" meant get murder 2. at the end of a week trial she got booted as an alternate, bummed because she had putt he time in, but also worried the mob would knock him to murder 1 when she saw NO EVIDENCE AT ALL to support that. No worries- in an hour they came back with murder 2.
a month later we read the guy got a 46 year sentence. why go for murder 1, with no case, when 2 is effectively life? the only reason i can see is to appear tough.
