King of Hits.co.uk - Your Views Messageboard

IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Home

Forums

	Messageboards	Categories Show latest posts

Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register. Lost Password?

Messageboards

King of Hits

Your Views Messageboard

Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"

Name:

Subject:

Boardcode:

Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons





More Smilies

Enter code here

Topic History of: Interview with Bill Cosby's defence lawyer
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
wjlmarsh	Jo wrote: Tom Mesereau Talks About The Cosby Trial & Verdict With P.I. Scott Ross Thanks Jo for this link. In this second trial I have found only one juror interviewed. So in the US a little light is shed on jury thinking and it is as expected when everyday people gather to give views and opinion. Similar say to many of the BBC question time or two -three or more politicians debating over issues. They often are emotionally, belief, party orientated but very seldom evidence based, with well thought out reasoning looking at all the facts and options (I have stopped watching because many needed questions are not asked, answers are wish washy and the only way I have any chance of staying sane is not to watch). The one juror was unable to clearly explain how he reached "the beyond reasonable doubt" standard even though he had no doubt whatsoever and his final evidence was well if you were there you would vote the same way. Well definitely does not meet my own "100 year rule" that states if one read the Bill Cosby trial in 100 years time (now that we live longer!!!!) and verdict related now as 100 years ago in time, the reader would have no trouble thinking "yes" whatever happened later they clearly made the correct choice from the evidence provided and it can clearly be seen. Well the juror's reasoning did not appear to even make 5 minutes. He believed Andrea Constand and believed Bill Cosby on his drug usage account but anything else he said he did not believe (my summing up of the logic of his reasoning) and no explanation how he knew what to believe and what conclusions the prosecutors drew from then recreational drug usage like some people drink alcohol to loosen up back 30 odd years to now equivalent of a drug of whatever = a rape drug in the now said year 30 years later. The truth I have no idea. The thing is that these cases do provide very good information to why the current justice systems need examining and many corrections, alterations and reassessing to take place in order to achieve fair trials and justice. The defense lawyer in his interview highlights many areas as well. BTW I am not really having a go at the juror as I see the juror was young and jurors are every day people untrained, ill equipped then thrown in to make a decision that no one can make. The jurors who have the misfortune to wake up to what they decided because they think too much to how they made the wrong decision because the court system allowed them to be emotionally persuaded either to acquit an obviously guilty person on the evidence when looked at objectively or find guilty when the evidence looked at objectively did not support that outcome might have some emotional effect. Perhaps they all could sue for compensation as that seems to be the modern trend.
Jo	Tom Mesereau Talks About The Cosby Trial & Verdict With P.I. Scott Ross