Uncensored Justice System Discussion    FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Not Guilty in Brandon Craig case - Any Thoughts?          Uncensored Justice System Discussion Forum Index -> Open Discussion View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message JUSTICE1st Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 715 Location: USA Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:23 pm    Post subject: Not Guilty in Brandon Craig case - Any Thoughts? I was watching as much as I could of the Brandon Craig case from Albuquerque, NM the last couple of weeks, and I was amazed at what I thought was the complete LACK of hard evidence the state had against Craig. Don't even get me started on the state's so-called "star witnesses!" From all I heard out of them on testimony, especially on the defense cross-examinations of each, not one of them had an ounce of credibility to stand on, especially Jocelyn Schneider. Since their so-called "eyewitness evidence" was basically all the state had against Craig, it was no surprise to me at all that the jury reached what I thought was entirely the right one in this case, which was NOT GUILTY. The prosecution in any case really needs to understand that if they go to trial, especially in a high-profile case, they really have to present much BETTER witnesses, in terms of credibility, than the three "star witnesses" the state of New Mexico presented in this trial. J1 _________________ "We must remember, always, that accusation is not proof, and conviction depends on evidence and due process of law." EDWARD R. MURROW, 1954 Back to top Pia Joined: 12 Dec 2007 Posts: 208 Location: www.freecynthia.com Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:14 am    Post subject: I watched snippets of this trial but not much of it. One thing I will say about it and a few others lately....It does look like they are getting jurors that are paying attention and making sure the prosecutor proves the crime. This case, Raynella Dossett Leath, Eric McLean, Mary Winkler, Kathleen Hilton, even Phil Spector's first trial....It seems like there was another one recently either a hung jury or an acquittal. It struck me that maybe they are wanting the proof now. I think since OJ's trial people wanted to be sure they didn't allow someone guilty to go free so they many had just decided if the state got them in there, they must be guilty...I hope that mindset is coming to an end. Maybe prosecutors will stop rushing into court with these circumstantial cases they are so fond of now and wait until they have real proof. _________________ Justice is conscience, not a personal conscience but the conscience of the whole of humanity. Those who clearly recognize the voice of their own conscience usually recognize also the voice of justice. Alexander Solzhenitsyn Back to top JUSTICE1st Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 715 Location: USA Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 1:04 pm    Post subject: Pia wrote: I watched snippets of this trial but not much of it. One thing I will say about it and a few others lately....It does look like they are getting jurors that are paying attention and making sure the prosecutor proves the crime. This case, Raynella Dossett Leath, Eric McLean, Mary Winkler, Kathleen Hilton, even Phil Spector's first trial....It seems like there was another one recently either a hung jury or an acquittal. It struck me that maybe they are wanting the proof now. I think since OJ's trial people wanted to be sure they didn't allow someone guilty to go free so they many had just decided if the state got them in there, they must be guilty...I hope that mindset is coming to an end. Maybe prosecutors will stop rushing into court with these circumstantial cases they are so fond of now and wait until they have real proof. I couldn't agree more, Pia, especially with your points about PROOF. In murder cases especially, it just makes sense for the prosecution to wait for hard, solid evidence before going to trial, especially in high-profile cases. Books like Grisham's THE INNOCENT MAN and others like it are (I hope) helping to educate the public, many of whom will one day be jurors, on how important it is to try and convict the CORRECT person for a heinous crime, not just anyone whom the police/prosecution doesn't like. If that means waiting for the hard evidence that proves a defendant's guilt, then the prosecution needs to wait. There's no statute of limitations on murder in any state, so it really makes no sense to rush to trial when the state doesn't have solid evidence of a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. J _________________ "We must remember, always, that accusation is not proof, and conviction depends on evidence and due process of law." EDWARD R. MURROW, 1954 Back to top Pia Joined: 12 Dec 2007 Posts: 208 Location: www.freecynthia.com Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:58 pm    Post subject: JUSTICE1st wrote: Pia wrote: I watched snippets of this trial but not much of it. One thing I will say about it and a few others lately....It does look like they are getting jurors that are paying attention and making sure the prosecutor proves the crime. This case, Raynella Dossett Leath, Eric McLean, Mary Winkler, Kathleen Hilton, even Phil Spector's first trial....It seems like there was another one recently either a hung jury or an acquittal. It struck me that maybe they are wanting the proof now. I think since OJ's trial people wanted to be sure they didn't allow someone guilty to go free so they many had just decided if the state got them in there, they must be guilty...I hope that mindset is coming to an end. Maybe prosecutors will stop rushing into court with these circumstantial cases they are so fond of now and wait until they have real proof. I couldn't agree more, Pia, especially with your points about PROOF. In murder cases especially, it just makes sense for the prosecution to wait for hard, solid evidence before going to trial, especially in high-profile cases. Books like Grisham's THE INNOCENT MAN and others like it are (I hope) helping to educate the public, many of whom will one day be jurors, on how important it is to try and convict the CORRECT person for a heinous crime, not just anyone whom the police/prosecution doesn't like. If that means waiting for the hard evidence that proves a defendant's guilt, then the prosecution needs to wait. There's no statute of limitations on murder in any state, so it really makes no sense to rush to trial when the state doesn't have solid evidence of a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. J I really do wish they would put The Innocent Man on the big screen. What an eye opener it would be for many... _________________ Justice is conscience, not a personal conscience but the conscience of the whole of humanity. Those who clearly recognize the voice of their own conscience usually recognize also the voice of justice. Alexander Solzhenitsyn Back to top JUSTICE1st Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 715 Location: USA Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:33 am    Post subject: Pia wrote: JUSTICE1st wrote: Pia wrote: I watched snippets of this trial but not much of it. One thing I will say about it and a few others lately....It does look like they are getting jurors that are paying attention and making sure the prosecutor proves the crime. This case, Raynella Dossett Leath, Eric McLean, Mary Winkler, Kathleen Hilton, even Phil Spector's first trial....It seems like there was another one recently either a hung jury or an acquittal. It struck me that maybe they are wanting the proof now. I think since OJ's trial people wanted to be sure they didn't allow someone guilty to go free so they many had just decided if the state got them in there, they must be guilty...I hope that mindset is coming to an end. Maybe prosecutors will stop rushing into court with these circumstantial cases they are so fond of now and wait until they have real proof. I couldn't agree more, Pia, especially with your points about PROOF. In murder cases especially, it just makes sense for the prosecution to wait for hard, solid evidence before going to trial, especially in high-profile cases. Books like Grisham's THE INNOCENT MAN and others like it are (I hope) helping to educate the public, many of whom will one day be jurors, on how important it is to try and convict the CORRECT person for a heinous crime, not just anyone whom the police/prosecution doesn't like. If that means waiting for the hard evidence that proves a defendant's guilt, then the prosecution needs to wait. There's no statute of limitations on murder in any state, so it really makes no sense to rush to trial when the state doesn't have solid evidence of a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. J I really do wish they would put The Innocent Man on the big screen. What an eye opener it would be for many... Oh, so do I! I had read about a year or so ago (can't remember from where now) that George Clooney had actually bought the rights to THE INNOCENT MAN, which usually means it will be made into a movie eventually. WHEN is the question, of course. But as eager as I am for this movie to be made and shown, I don't want them to rush it, as that would be a mistake. This story needs to have as many details shown as possible in a film. J _________________ "We must remember, always, that accusation is not proof, and conviction depends on evidence and due process of law." EDWARD R. MURROW, 1954 Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         Uncensored Justice System Discussion Forum Index -> Open Discussion All times are GMT Page 1 of 1   Jump to: Select a forum Announcements----------------Announcements Open Discussion----------------Open Discussion Legal Cases----------------Jude LaCour CaseCasey Anthony CaseRyan Ferguson CaseSears Tower BombingAnthony PellicanoCynthia SommerO. J. SimpsonMarc Benayer CaseMark JensenPhil SpectorRaye Dawn SmithSean Bell Shooting CaseSteve "Happy" GilmoreTexas Polygamous SectWest Memphis 3"Other Cases"Judge Elizabeth HalversonSean Fitzpatrick Innocence Project----------------Innocence Project The Fully Informed Jury----------------Jury Education Misconduct----------------Judicial MisconductProsecutorial MisconductLaw Enforcement Misconduct Criminal Justice Reforms----------------Criminal Justice ReformsJuvenile JusticePrison/Jail Reform Issues Books----------------Books Politics----------------War in IraqImmigrationDeath PenaltyElectionsPolitics in General Other----------------ReligionGeneral Philosophical Ideas Fun and Creative Stuff----------------GamesJokesFunny CrimesPoetry Suggestions----------------Suggestions  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum