Sounds more like it was really a verdict of "not proved" rather than "not guilty", then.
Well, the standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt". If the prosecution failed to meet that, then the jury really had no choice.
Wash: So, two days in a hospital? That's awful. Don't you just hate doctors? Simon: Hey. Wash: I mean, present company excluded. Jayne: Let's not be excluding people. That'd be rude.
'Ariel'
Natter 68: Bork Bork Bork
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
Consuela - Jul 05, 2011 9:37:21 am PDT #15388 of 30001
We are Buffistas. This isn't our first apocalypse. -- Pix
sj - Jul 05, 2011 9:59:19 am PDT #15389 of 30001
"There are few hours in life more agreeable than the hour dedicated to the ceremony known as afternoon tea."
Well, the standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt". If the prosecution failed to meet that, then the jury really had no choice.
I can't believe the verdict. But I think the biggest problem in the not proven part is that they didn't prove cause of death, which I guess made the accidental drowning a reasonable doubt.
le nubian - Jul 05, 2011 10:51:06 am PDT #15390 of 30001
"And to be clear, I am the hell. And the high water."
it sounds to me like the woman should have gone down for negligent homicide at the very least. but I don't know what Florida's rules are.
sj - Jul 05, 2011 10:52:53 am PDT #15391 of 30001
"There are few hours in life more agreeable than the hour dedicated to the ceremony known as afternoon tea."
it sounds to me like the woman should have gone down for negligent homicide at the very least. but I don't know what Florida's rules are.
I'm not sure the jury had that option.
le nubian - Jul 05, 2011 11:05:16 am PDT #15392 of 30001
"And to be clear, I am the hell. And the high water."
well, that may explain it!
Jesse - Jul 05, 2011 11:16:29 am PDT #15393 of 30001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Hey, is bon bon ever around anymore? I have a question about this: [link]
Cashmere - Jul 05, 2011 11:41:47 am PDT #15394 of 30001
Now tagless for your comfort.
There wasn't enough hard evidence to convict Anthony--but people have been convicted of murder based on circumstantial evidence before. I still think she did it.
I'm sick thinking of how she'll profit from her notoriety. Ugh.
Typo Boy - Jul 05, 2011 12:00:49 pm PDT #15395 of 30001
Calli: My people have a saying. A man who trusts can never be betrayed, only mistaken.Avon: Life expectancy among your people must be extremely short.
Always curious about how people get acquitted or convicted. "Innocent until proven guilty" in practice seems to turn into "Guilty until proven innocent" or even "guilty even when there is overwhelming evidence for innocent". But if the defense attorney is pricey enough then "innocent until proven guilty" really does become the standard.
brenda m - Jul 05, 2011 12:00:58 pm PDT #15396 of 30001
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
They did have a number of other lesser charges that she wasn't convicted on either, so I have to think the prosecution's case was really seriously weak.
Nora Deirdre - Jul 05, 2011 12:08:14 pm PDT #15397 of 30001
I’m responsible for my own happiness? I can’t even be responsible for my own breakfast! (Bojack Horseman)
"Innocent until proven guilty" in practice seems to turn into "Guilty until proven innocent" or even "guilty even when there is overwhelming evidence for innocent". But if the defense attorney is pricey enough then "innocent until proven guilty" really does become the standard.
Yes, class and especially race figure into this situation quite significantly.