That could well be.
Although that 10% will probably make enough noise to try to drown out the 90%. Lol.
1 Like
I’m honestly not 100% sure but I thought they were two separate charges and were to be decided independent of the attempted murder/agg assault charges. But I certainly could be wrong!
Since you are going through the process of how to evaluate the charges, can I ask you my question that Rowdy keeps evading?
Put yourself in the shoes of someone related to a person in MB’s position. Choose whomsoever is meaningful to you. Then take the following into account:
- no forensics were done on the weapon
- no testing was done on anyone’s hands at the scene
- the only ‘evidence’ presented was the mismatched stories of two people who were demonstrated to have lied while under oath (false in one; false in all) and have verifiable criminal/drug backgrounds
In that situation, would you feel that it was correct if your loved one was found guilty? If you were on the jury, would you look at the evidence presented and convict your loved one?
Again, it’s just a way of framing it and I wonder how people would answer from this perspective.
4 Likes
I am sure there are 2 people (at least) reading this and going “DAMN! That would have been the TICKET!!!”
after all the 2 ‘victims’ are self professed drug users…
4 Likes
Not picking on you, @Helicon, but I only wish the above were true.
I trained for years with an Olympian who was cluster B… she had self-control when she wanted to. She frequently lost her temper with horses and humans, used abusive training practices, had horses rear over backwards or shut down. Any horse that wouldn’t accept her methods was bounced out of the program as “crazy”.
She could put on a different face in public (though her true colours were known in our region/sport) so she had certain esteemed horsemen who respected her. That was because she was careful they didn’t see her other side. She provoked her neighbours for years until finally, she got herself injured by her neighbour which resulted in a trial that she won for personal injury…
After that I don’t trust any kind of credentials to mean a person is good or trustworthy or skilled or humane. “Don’t meet your heroes”…
Having said that, everything I described above reminds me of the gunshot victim. I had a very hard time watching her cross-examination because her behaviours and speech patterns were so reminiscent of my ex-coach.
15 Likes
LK said MB shot me to 911. He told Dr Simring he got the gun out of the safe. He drove there. LK had 2 bullet wounds. RG spoke to 911 and corroborated LK’s testimony while sounding like he is struggling. LE arrives. RG is on top of MB. Same gun is under MB. RG tells LE that MB is the shooter. RC tells LE it is her gun and she gave it to MB. Ear witness testifies LK told him MB shot me in the heart.
3 Likes
One, that’s why jurors are selected to be impartial . You can’t weigh the evidence if you have an emotional connection.
Two, I would not discount a case because of what isn’t there. Again, if physical evidence isn’t present or not obtained in a rape, I would not consider that the testimony of the victim is insufficient to convict.
As a relative, would I be sad or angry? Sure, but I would not be a juror.
2 Likes
I think I’d like you to put me on ignore if you don’t mind. I’m really sorry I just don’t know how to respond to this nonsense.
2 Likes
I know all that. I wasn’t looking for (yet another) description of the jury process. I know one wouldn’t be on the jury for one’s own relative’s case.
I was asking from a specific perspective: would the the fact that there was a lack of investigation and corroborating evidence not bother you to the point that you would accept the conviction of your loved one as reasonable? Not be sad, not be angry.
Would a conviction based on the lack of evidence and basically on the strength of the mismatched stories of two proven/admitted liars (false in one; false in all) with criminal backgrounds, histories of drug use, and an admitted scheme to destroy, seem reasonable to you from that perspective?
5 Likes
To me, it seems likely that there could be at least one person on the jury who has had a similar experience, if not more. Which could easily result in reasonable doubt.
I mean, if it were a jury of horse people, it would probably be a minimum of 10 out of 12 who had that happen. But for 12 regular people, it’s probably still at least one or two.
5 Likes
Omg I have no idea what this is. To me, snowflake means weak. So if snowflake here on COTH means cartoon princesses singing then I have to apologize because I got it completely wrong lol.
2 Likes
I’ll ask you the same question. Just looking for a simple answer, not a huge explanation.
Put yourself in the shoes of someone related to a defendant in this position. Choose whomsoever is meaningful to you. Then take the following into account:
- no forensics were done on the weapon
- no testing was done on anyone’s hands at the scene
- the only ‘evidence’ presented was the mismatched stories of two people who were demonstrated to have lied while under oath, have verifiable criminal/drug histories, and an admitted scheme to destroy the defendant
In that situation, would you feel that it was correct if your loved one was found guilty?
6 Likes
For me, part of the problem here is that there was a possibility for more evidence and that the police had the opportunity to collect - or attempt to collect - more physical evidence. Whether they didn’t due to lack of foresight, training, resources (county not wanting to spend $ on tests or if labs are backed up) or just plain overconfidence that additional evidence was unnecessary, suggests to me a lack of due diligence. This to me is very different from a case where there isn’t physical evidence to collect.
16 Likes
Well… they’re not wrong. Lol.
1 Like
I would accept the jury’s verdict. Because that is how the judicial system works, and I believe in the judicial system.
I believe in the election sy stem. So I accept the vote even if my candidate loses.
1 Like
Maybe and maybe not. Now we will never know.
That’s a lot of people saying a lot of things. That’s not forensic evidence.
Someone could get shot and say “so and so” shot me. You can’t base your belief off of that claim. It could very well be true, but it also needs to be proven. It shouldn’t just go off of word.
On a side note, not addressed to anyone in particular: how many gunshot victims and/or victims of violent attacks (that are able to call 911), name the person(s) who shot/attacked them in their 911 call? Is that common? I suppose it could be helpful, but could also mislead if untrue.
6 Likes
As much as you want this to demonstrate guilt absolute, it just doesn’t.
The lack of credibility of the witnesses is a huge part. And given multiple very possible scenarios which cannot be excluded by non existent forensic evidence, proof of your stated narrative BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT just has not been demonstrated.
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
12 Likes
Exactly this.
I’m also confused why people don’t just answer: yes, I’d be sad but I would understand that this was a reasonable outcome given the evidence presented; or no, I would feel there simply was not enough evidence presented to deprive my loved one of his life and liberty.
No need to extrapolate to other hypothetical cases. Just looking at the circumstances presented by this exact case. Why is it so hard to just answer that question?
9 Likes
But I would you feel that it was reasonable? That, given the evidence, you could completely understand how they arrived at that decision and you could imagine that you, yourself, would also arrive at that same decision?
Not if you would accept it; would it, to your mind, be a reasonable and just outcome given the evidence?
3 Likes
