The family were baaad witnesses. Even in the light of the prior bad acts evidence, the person is tried for the current crime. And the jury wasn't convinced by these people.
I think he's a child molester, and I wouldn't have been able to vote for guilty on the evidence presented.
Yes, you're right - in THEORY the prior bad acts aren't supposed to be used for proof of the current crime, but in actuality, that is rarely the case.
As far as all the evidence presented? I haven't read the entire trial transcript (just pieces of it), so I really can't say whether I could have voted guilty given the evidence.
Yes, the family members were extremely bad witnesses, but still...it just too disappointing.
Comments 2
The family were baaad witnesses. Even in the light of the prior bad acts evidence, the person is tried for the current crime. And the jury wasn't convinced by these people.
I think he's a child molester, and I wouldn't have been able to vote for guilty on the evidence presented.
Reply
As far as all the evidence presented? I haven't read the entire trial transcript (just pieces of it), so I really can't say whether I could have voted guilty given the evidence.
Yes, the family members were extremely bad witnesses, but still...it just too disappointing.
Reply
Leave a comment