From: Warrl kyree Tale'sedrin (warrl@mail.blarg.net)
Date: Thu Mar 26 1998 - 12:10:32 MST
> From: "Mark D. Fulwiler" <mfulwiler@earthlink.net>
> "Warrl kyree Tale'sedrin" <warrl@mail.blarg.net> wrote:
>
> > > As it is, even unanimous juries make many mistakes. A lot
> > > of convictions are overturned after new evidence comes out after the
> > > trial.
>
> > I don't consider that a mistake on the jury's part. If there's an
> > error, it's on the part of the investigators for not finding that
> > evidence in the first place, or on the part of the people who had the
> > evidence for not bringing it forward sooner. The jury cannot be held
> > at fault for not considering the unknown.
>
> The jury is supposed to find a person guilty of a criminal offense only
> if the evidence proves him guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." Of course
> the jury cannot be held responsible for not considering the unknown.
> However, if evidence surfaces after the trial that exonerates the
> defendant, I think it's fair to say that the jury made a mistake in
> concluding that the evidence presented at the trial proved the
> defendant's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Sometimes the truth is not reasonable.
US$500 fee for receipt of unsolicited commercial email. USC 47.5.II.227
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:48 MST