Phil spectre trial

[Peikko 1,575]

Is this another case of a jury bowing under the pressure of 'celebrity' money?

Link

Ok, I can't spell Spector!

Edited September 19, 2007 by Purple_Hibiscus

[almaty 19]

it is strange..i thought, he was guilty as hell

[Peikko 1,575]

Personally, I think he is responsible for her death but I am not entirely sure what level of culpability can be laid at his door which I guess is where the jury is at.

It's an odd way to kill someone, to put the gun in the mouth (I don't think there is any doubt that this is where the gun went off). However, he could have been indulging in some perverted power/sexual role playing that she didn't really want to participate in I guess?

[john_and_marlene 162]

it is strange..i thought, he was guilty as hell

Justice isn't about how guilty he is. It's about what the prosecution can prove he did. Even if he is absolutely guilty, a jury should find otherwise if the prosecution does not meet the burden of proof. If more jurys held the prosecution to that burden rather than voting their gut, perhaps there would be fewer innocent people in prison.

Edited September 19, 2007 by john_and_marlene

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

it is strange..i thought, he was guilty as hell

so you mean we can expect him to be breaking and entering some place to get his memorabilia back also?

[almaty 19]

it is strange..i thought, he was guilty as hell

so you mean we can expect him to be breaking and entering some place to get his memorabilia back also?

yeap..he be looking for his old Wall of Music

Edited September 19, 2007 by almaty

[Jasman0717 9]

Wonder if they go for a new trial if its a hung jury

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

Wonder if they go for a new trial if its a hung jury

let's get a rope and find out

[Addie_Goodvibes 0]

Personally, I think he is responsible for her death but I am not entirely sure what level of culpability can be laid at his door which I guess is where the jury is at.

It's an odd way to kill someone, to put the gun in the mouth (I don't think there is any doubt that this is where the gun went off). However, he could have been indulging in some perverted power/sexual role playing that she didn't really want to participate in I guess?

So Now they will offer the jury a manslaughter charge which IMO shoul dhave been allowed to begin with.

What A waste of time, by the Judge not allowing the Manslaugter charge to begin with ( per Defense request) we later learn that he may have not have been right in doing so.

I think Mansalughter is more realsitic given the circumstances, culpability has been proven now the jury needs to fliter all the BS from the defense "forensic experts" one of whom was the Forsenic spcialist for the Kennedy Assasination so we would think people like him could not be "bought" yet he was able to lay out a professional analysis that concluded Lana shot herself

[Addie_Goodvibes 0]

it is strange..i thought, he was guilty as hell

Justice isn't about how guilty he is. It's about what the prosecution can prove he did. Even if he is absolutely guilty, a jury should find otherwise if the prosecution does not meet the burden of proof. If more jurys held the prosecution to that burden rather than voting their gut, perhaps there would be fewer innocent people in prison.

Agreed however when a judge does not allow lesser charges such as manslaughter the Burden of proof is higher and prosecution has to prove beyon reasonable doubt that First degree murder was commited. Murder conviction requires The prosecution to prove Intent ,malice aforthought

Level of Culpability & Intent are what have to be considered.

yes he is guilty of Criminal negligence and wrecklessness resulting in death, was it intentional I would argue not. Had the Jury been allowed to intially consider manslaughter the case may very well be decided.