Jury Rigged

glenn b says:

Hi Bob,

I disagree and base my disagreement upon my almost 32 years to date as an LEO. I think they probably did right since they were not there to deliberate whether or not they thought or believed or felt she was guilty but were there to deliberate whether or not she had been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I think, from what little I have heard reported of the actual facts presented in evidence, there was more than a reasonable doubt – just the fact that the prosecution could not even establish a cause of death was a strong point in that direction. I do not see the similarity between this and the OJ trial in that regard. I think the OJ jury was out of its collective mind after hearing much of the evidence that was introduced in court.

Then again, I think both cases were lost, in great part, due to ill prepared and for each particular case, inept prosecution teams (yes they may have been great on other cases but were not prepared for these cases as they should have been). For me to have read a quote tonight, of one of the prosecuting attorneys, to the effect that he can not believe the jurors just did not see the same thing when they looked at the post-mortem pics of the victim says alot. Quote is from Fox News: “I can only assume that the jurors didn’t see what I saw in the pictures of the remains,” . Yes they saw what he saw, what they did not do was read more into them than they saw or read the same things into them that the prosecutor had hoped they would read into them. He, seemingly, read a lot more into those pics but that is not evidence that is supposition. That they did not think the same way as did he is where he went wrong. He apaprently assumed they would do so because as the Fox article also pointed out, he said ‘not once until he heard the not guilty verdicts did he think he could have lost the case’. (see: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/07/06/prosecutor-jeff-ashton-can-only-assumejurorsdidntsee-what-saw/.

He seemingly based his case, and was probaly betting the jury would give their verdict, based upon shock value of those pics and the emotions that would entail once they were seen by the jurors. Maybe he only feels that way now after the trial but my guess is if he feels that way now, enought to say it in public, then he must have been feeling the same way during and before the trial. If that is really what he thought before the case went to trial, it was foolishness at its best. It is not an uncommon shortcoming even among the most experienced prosecutors to think that everyone is going to see it their way. The thing about it is that this often leads to them being over confident and thus they go for cases when they are not ready to do so because the case is lacking something important, like enough evidence.

Just my .83 cents on it. I figure she probably killed her child, most people probably feel likewise, but the jurors decided there was a reasonable doubt and I can understand how they thought so. The fact that they deliberated for only 11 hours says that they were pretty convinced of their verdict too and that there was more than enough reasonable doubt to acquit. Yet, I would be willing to bet that most of them, the jurors, probably think she did it.

All the best,
Glenn B

ps: feel better with the rash, I am just about stopping typing every few words to scratch the rashes on several parts of me as I type. Poison something or other as my doc told me today but I figure it is really a case of the creeping crud.

Cap'n Bob says:

Having been on dozens of juries over the years, I can understand how the panel must adhere to the instructions from the judge. Evidently, there was something in the package that compelled them to acquit. I blame the prosecutors.

The doc has me on steroids and a topical cream to treat the rash. I just started the regimen so it’s too early to tell if it will be effective.

I hope your ‘crud’ gets better . . . 😉

Cap'n Bob says:

Yep – we have seen that. As life members of the NRA, we get regular email correspondence on all anti-firearms activity. A while back, I moved all the second amendment topics to the other website where we have an interesting Ramirez cartoon posted on that very topic.