Skip to main content

View Diary: Misinterpreting Legal Language is the REAL Racism (35 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This, I think, (0+ / 0-)

    is where the diarist has a valid point.  Prosecutors will bring to court those cases they perceive can be won - either on some basis in law or because they have reason to believe the judge or jury, whichever the case may be, will rule in their favor.  This is where the mores and interpretations of individuals come into play, I think.

    •  The Petersen case is another example (0+ / 0-)

      where I have watched the "Staircase" documentary several times and it seems to me that the prosecutors went so far overboard that an appeal would be automatically granted. Instead, he has exhausted his appeals.

      It was astounding to me, as an example, to have an alleged previous bad act (the alleged murder of the mother of his adopted children) to be introduced as evidence in his trial for the death of his wife. Even more incredible, when the first coroner had ruled the death accidental, the prosecutors had her body exhumed and their medical examiner could not state with certainty that she had been murdered. Then this supposition was presented to the jury.

      Or the elaborate theory about how he used the "firepoke" as the murder weapon and how he disposed of it, only to have the defense find the firepoke in the basement with no indication it had been moved in years.

      The final example was the prosecution's theory that Petersen had killed his wife because he was molesting their daughters and also alleged that he was the biological father of their adopted daughters.  After DNA blew that theory out of the water, the prosecution, without missing a beat, presented their next theory.

      Bottom line is that the defendant had a nonSouthern lawyer and he was caught supposedly making a date for himself online with a bisexual and that is why the jury convicted him, IMHO.    

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site