Politics and Religion

He wasn't guilty
AnotherPerspective 294 reads
posted

The prosecution didn't have  enough proof  to convince the jury .

 A retrial and new jury would reach the same verdict .



 

Posted By: Officer Cartman
The prosecution is already saying they won't have a retrial.

Another moral, justified democrat who was a victim of the vast right-wing conspiracy.  The liberal barometer is no jail time = American hero.  You're all scumbags who follow scumbags!

Are you not the least bit embarrassed this dirt bag you almost put in the Oval Office is a giant loser like the rest of your team. I thank God as an American that he didn't didn't make POTUS or VP because we would all look like fools to the world. You should be ashamed Dems. I wish I was a high profile  DEM so I could pop hookers all day long on the grounds of the White House and not get busted.  

Oh yea , "I didn't know it was marijuana " ~ Barney Franks

Tusayan748 reads

Posted By: Officer Cartman
Another moral, justified democrat who was a victim of the vast right-wing conspiracy.  The liberal barometer is no jail time = American hero.  You're all scumbags who follow scumbags!
Edwards was only found not guilty on one count. The judge declared a mistrial when the jury could not  reach a unanimous verdict on five other counts.

The prosecution is already saying they won't have a retrial.

-- Modified on 5/31/2012 5:47:53 PM

AnotherPerspective295 reads

The prosecution didn't have  enough proof  to convince the jury .

 A retrial and new jury would reach the same verdict .



 

Posted By: Officer Cartman
The prosecution is already saying they won't have a retrial.

It is often the case that there is a hung verdict the first time and a different jury reaches a guilty verdict the next time.

In fact, the very reason that re-trial are allowed is a recognition that different juries can reach different verdicts, and since the first one is not "Not Guilty," but "We don't know," a second jury is asked to decide.

To say a re-trial would reach the same result is not based on anything

Posted By: AnotherPerspective
  The prosecution didn't have  enough proof  to convince the jury .

 A retrial and new jury would reach the same verdict .



 
Posted By: Officer Cartman
The prosecution is already saying they won't have a retrial.

Ergo, what are you complaining about? It turns out, he didn't break the law. :)

I will say this...at least Edwards had to go to court. I seem to remember a certain criminal (I won't say his name, but his initials are "Scooter Libby") was given a pardon to cover another criminal's ass.

Edwards is a scumbag, but he's not much more of a scumbag than any of the posters here.

I would like to set the bar higher for our Senators and Presidents than scumbag hobbyists such as ourselves.

Timbow812 reads

Posted By: willywonka4u
Ergo, what are you complaining about? It turns out, he didn't break the law. :)

I will say this...at least Edwards had to go to court. I seem to remember a certain criminal (I won't say his name, but his initials are "Scooter Libby") was given a pardon to cover another criminal's ass.

Edwards is a scumbag, but he's not much more of a scumbag than any of the posters here.

Just to be clear, the was not found "not guilty" on all charges.  Just on one.  On five the jury could not decide either way.

Personally, I think he was overcharged and the maximum time he was facing is stupid, but a little precision is called for in legal matters.

Tusayan641 reads

Posted By: dncphil
Just to be clear, the was not found "not guilty" on all charges.  Just on one.  On five the jury could not decide either way.

Personally, I think he was overcharged and the maximum time he was facing is stupid, but a little precision is called for in legal matters.
There were reports that the jury vote was 11-1 for acquittal on the other charges but a unamimous vote was needed.

Register Now!