This. I am constantly appalled. Most acquittals are because the evidence is circumstantial, which allows for doubt. But very often, that doubt isn't "reasonable" and a guy EVERYONE knows is guilty walks. Yes, it's the prosecution's job to prove the case. And often we do, but it's still circumstantial.
A guy tells his coworkers that he wants to kill his wife because she had an affair. He goes and buys a hunting knife at a sporting goods store with a serrated edge. He goes out drinking until 1 am and gets smashed. He goes home and at 2am calls the police distraught because he "found his wife" murdered in their bedroom. Stabbed with a serrated edge. Husband has no alibi, but neither does boyfriend. A note is found typed, "signed" by the wife, saying she is afraid of her boyfriend because he's pissed that she won't leave her husband.
Husband is tried and acquitted. And it's the prosecution's fault for not proving the case? Some juries are downright stupid. They develop a certain spirit during deliberations; some are "let's look at the bigger picture", others are "let's examine each vein of each leaf of each tree in the entire forest".
Whew. Rant over.
Hi everyone! Good morning! Anything new today? Did anyone manage to get an SGN sold to them??
