0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
the most impressive part is that the jury only took like 3 hours to reach a verdict, including lunch...
There is a difference between believing the state's theory is wrong and if you were on the jury you would've found him not guilty and believing that Adnan is innocent/not guilty.I am probably in the first camp, probably not yet in the second camp.
Do you all have all the info now the jury had or is this person selectively feeding you info? If you're being manipulated seems really rough ridin' dumb to judge the jurors. Also privileged and/or successful people do really mumped up crap occassionally like murder or rape or molest. There has to be a first time.
From reading this thread it just seems like this broad is leading people around by the nose. I'm very comfortable agreeing that several members if not the entirety of the jury were imbeciles. That's just how it is. Doesn't mean they got it wrong though.
Quote from: Mr Bread on November 21, 2014, 01:25:56 PMFrom reading this thread it just seems like this broad is leading people around by the nose. I'm very comfortable agreeing that several members if not the entirety of the jury were imbeciles. That's just how it is. Doesn't mean they got it wrong though. We are listening to a podcast, of course we are evaluating the facts through the filter of the narrator. Just like the jurors didn't gumshoe the case and argue it to themselves. Good grief.
A weird thing is that I believe as a rule, you aren't supposed to take into account that he didn't testify, but that juror made it sound like they convicted him because he didn't take the stand to defend himself. Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
The donation isn't to fight this guy's appeal. It is to be entertained by a second season of an awesome podcast, which will have nothing to do with this case.